Tag Archives: salafiyyah


As I continue to work out the final knots and kinks in the 2nd edition of the Divine Lightning, I still had a huge demand for the first edition. So what I have done is re-release the first edition as a reprint.

It is essentially the exact same as the first print run with the exception of (1) the margins have been modified, (2) some of the notes reorganised and (3) I gave it a very simple cover for the time being while work on the 2nd edition is underway. Besides this, there has been neither addition nor subtraction to the text.

Please enjoy this for the time being while we prepare for the 2nd edition of the Divine Lightning and resolve the issues with manuscript and Arabic font work.

Until next time,

Al-Hajj Abu Ja`far Al-Hanbali


“But what’s your daleel!”

[ لا عبرة بقول من يريد إلزام الناس بمعرفة الدليل لكل مسألة ]

There are no satisfactory grounds for the one who desires to compel people to know the evidence for each and every point

قال الفقيه أبو الوفاء ابن عقيل رحمه الله :

The Faqih, Abul Wafa’ Ibn `Aqil,[1] may Allah be pleased with him, remarked:

» ولا عِبْرَة بقول من زَعَم أن على العامِّيِّ العلمَ بدليلٍ يرشِده إلى حكْم الحادثِة ؛ لأن ذلك يقطعه عن مصالحهِ، ولا يَتأَتى منه ولا له دَرْك البغْيَةِ؛ لكون ذلك يحتاج إلى تقدُّمِ معرفةِ أصولِ الفقهِ على ما قدَّمْنا، وأَنَّى ذلك للعامِّيِّ.«

“There are no satisfactory grounds for the one who would claim that the layman must have knowledge of an evidence in order to resolve a new affair as this will assuredly take him away from the affairs necessary for the upkeep of the earthly realm and its continuation.[2] And this is not of him or for him to know this level of information as that gives rise to also needing to access the aforementioned knowledge of Usul ul-Fiqh and how is that the providence of the layman?”

الواضح (1/270).

And this is taken from Imam Ibn `Aqil’s work, Al-Wadih, vol.1, p.270.

قلت : ويقصد ( قول من زعم أن على العامي …) المعتزلة ، لأنهم يوجبون على العوام معرفة الدليل لكل مسألة ، وقد صرح بذلك أبو الحسين البصري المعتزلي ، وكذا القدرية كما ذكر ذلك الموفق في الروضة ، وتقي الدين رحمهما الله .

I would like to mention that the intent of his expression the one who would claim that the layman must have knowledge of an evidence references to the Mu`tazilah, as they made it wajib for the laity to know the evidence and proof for each and every matter. And that was explicitly mentioned by the Mu`tazilah scholar Abul Hussain Al-Basri. And the same thing was the position of the Qadariyyah as that was mentioned by Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah[3] in Ar-Rawdah and Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah,[4] may Allah be pleased with both of them.

فكل من يلزم أو يزعم أن على عامة الامة معرفة الدليل فهو في مصاف أهل البدع.

So anyone who requires or claims that it is required of the laity of the Ummah to know the evidence in all matters, then he is following on the pathway of the people of innovation and astrayness.

وكتب فارس بن فالح الخزرجي

And this was written by (Shaikh) Faaris ibn Faalih Al-Khazraji

21 / شعبان / 1442

21 Sha`ban 1442

[1] 431-513 (AD 1036-1118). He is Abul Wafa’ `Ali ibn `Aqil ibn Muihammad ibn `Aqil ibn Ahmad Al-Baghdadi Az-Zufri. One of the luminaries of his time, Shaikh ul-Islam and theologian of many areas, he is author of many works covering fiqh, usul and theology. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol. 3, pp.118-135.

[2] This is in reference to taqlid. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, from the third blessed generation, said of the matter of taqlid, “Whoever says that he does not believe in taqlid and that he does not follow anyone in his religion, such is the statement of a rebellious sinner in the sight of Allah and His Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Such a one only seeks by doing so to nullify and strip the footsteps given before, and to nullify the knowledge and the Sunnah. They want to stay isolated and alone with personal opinion, speculative theology, innovation and contradiction, and opposition to what came before them.” Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol.1, pp. 33-34. Imam al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (d. 463 AH), may Allah be pleased with him, when commenting upon these and other statements of Imam Ahmad and other scholars, said: “We have already mentioned in detail the evidence that the mujtahid will use when he looks into knowing the rulings of the Revealed Law. Now all that remains is to discuss what authority the common person returns to in acting on an issue, and this is known as taqlid. The general meaning is that taqlid refers to accepting the statement of someone without knowing any evidence for it. Rulings are built upon two matters; rational and those pertaining to the Revealed Law. As for the rational, then it is not permissible to make taqlid in this area, in matters such as knowing the Creator, Exalted be He, and His Attributes, knowing the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, testifying to his truthfulness and other matters that have to do with judgements and punishments to come in the Hereafter. It has, however, been narrated from `Ubaidullah ibn Al-Hasan al-`Anbari, who said that taqlid in the foundations of the religion is permissible, but this is a mistake due to the Words of Allah the Exalted, Follow what was sent down to you from your Lord and do not follow those besides Him as protectors. Little indeed do you reflect.  Surat ul-A`raf (7), ayah 3. Allah has also said, When it is said to them, ‘Follow that which Allah sent down,’ they say, ‘We shall follow what we found our fathers upon.’ And if your fathers did not know anything nor were they guided. Surat ul-Baqarah (2), ayah 170. The Exalted One has further said, Likewise, we did not send before you to any town a warner except that its inhabitants said, ‘We found our fathers upon a religion and we shall follow in their footsteps.’ Say, ‘What if I have come to you with more guidance than that which you found our fathers upon.’ Surat uz-Zukhruf (43), ayah 23. When the following of their fathers prevented them from accepting that which is more guided, they said, We do not believe in that which you have sent to us. Surat uz-Zukhruf(43), ayah 24. The Exalted One has said, Recite to them the news of Ibrahim when he said to his father and people, ‘What do you worship?’ They said, ‘We worship idols and we are steadfast in maintaining them.’ Say, ‘Do they hear you when you call on them and can they benefit or harm you?’ They said, ‘We found our fathers doing likewise before us.’ Surat ush-Shu`ara’ (26), ayat 69-74. They, therefore, abandoned giving the answer to the issue due to their inablility to do so and the question actually exposed the falsity of their position. The people mentioned what they had not been asked regarding their fathers and their making taqlid of them. The Exalted One has also said, ‘They said, Our Lord, we obeyed our leaders and senior folk, and they led us astray from the path.’ Surat ul-Ahzab (33), ayah 67.The Exalted One also said, They took their priests and rabbis as lords besides Allah. Surat ut-Tawbah (9), ayah 31. `Adi ibn Hatim said, I came to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, while I was wearing a crucifix around my neck made of gold. He said, Ibn Hatim, remove this idol from your neck. I took it off and then he recited the whole of Surah Bara’ah until he reached, They took their priests and rabbis as lords besides Allah. Surat ut-Tawbah (9), ayah 31. I said, Messenger of Allah, we did not worship them. So the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, Did they make permissible the impermissible and you obeyed them and they made the permissible impermissible and you obeyed them? I said, yes and he said, Then that is worship of them. Abul Bukhtari said that Hudhaifah was asked about the ayah, They took their priests and rabbis as lords besides Allah, how the people worshipped their priests and rabbis. Hudhaifah answered, ‘They made permissible what Allah declared impermissible and they made impermissible what Allah had made permissible’.” Imam Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, may Allah be pleased with him, commented further after quoting all this, “So because the principles of the faith that we mentioned have to do with what is awareness and intellect, and the people all share in that matter, there is to be no taqlid in the foundations. As for the judgements and rulings of the Revealed Law, then there are two points regarding taqlid: 1) One knows by necessity from the religion of the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, the compulsory nature of things like the five prayers, zakah, fasting the month of Ramadan, Hajj. It is also known by necessity the impermissibility of fornication and adultery, taking intoxicants and other such things. In these matters, there is no taqlid, for all people share in knowing them and having knowledge of them, so taqlid has no basis in this matter. 2) There are the things that are not known except by investigation and gathering evidence, such as the branches of worship, transactions, marriage, divorce matters and other things that are connected to the foundational rulings. This is a matter in which one does taqlid, according to the evidence of the statement of Allah the Exalted, Ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know. Surat un-Nahl (16), ayah 43. If we should stop taqlid in these matters that are from the branches of the religion, it would have been necessary for everyone to learn that knowledge, and by obligating this it would stop all occupations, the cultivation of the earth, whether it be crops, livestock or the movement of people from place to place. Thus it is necessary that everyone is not responsible for this knowledge. The one who does taqlid is the layman. The layman does not know the different ways that the rulings of the Revealed Law are found, so it is permissible for such a person to make taqlid of a scholar and act by his words. Allah the Exalted has said, Ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know. `Amr ibn Qais said of the ayah, ‘Those to be asked are the People of Knowledge’. It is narrated from Ibn `Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, that there was a man with a head injury in the time of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, who had a wet dream and was commanded to make ghusl, and upon doing so died. Once this reached the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, he said, ‘They have killed him. May Allah kill them. The only cure for when someone does not know something is to ask a question’. When the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, was asked after that, he answered, ‘If he had washed his body, but left his head and wiped over it, this would have been sufficient’. Because that man was not from the people of ijtihad, it was compulsory for him to make taqlid just as the blind person makes taqlid regarding the direction of prayer. If he does not have with him the tool of ijtihad in the direction of prayer, he is to make taqlid of the person with sight regarding the matter. It is narrated from one of the Mu`tazilah, who said that it is not permissible for the layman or common man to act by the statement of the scholar until he knows the ruling for it. When he has asked the scholar the matter, then he only asks him to know the ruling and when he finds the evidence behind it, he acts by it. This is a clear mistake, as there is no way for the layman to go to the evidences except after studying for years and keeping the company of and mixing with the scholars of fiqh for a long period of time. He will then have to investigate the rules and ways of analogy, know what validates and nullifies it and what is compsulory to give preference to in regards to other evidence and the preference of one evidence over another, but by making the layman responsible for this, one is charging him with what he is not able to do and has no way to reach it. As for the scholar, is it permissible for him to make taqlid of another scholar? The matter has to be investigated. If there is plenty of time to look into the issue and it is possible for him to make ijtihad, then it is necessary for him to make ijtihad for the ruling and it is not permissible for the scholar to make taqlid. There are some who have declared it permissible for the scholar to make taqlid, and this has been stated by Imam Sufyan ath-Thawri. He said, ‘Whatever the scholars of fiqh have differed in, I do not forbid any one of my brothers from taking hold of it. When the man sees an action being done that the scholars of fiqh have differed in and you have another position besides him, do not forbid him from the action’. Muhammad ibn Al-Hasan ash-Shaibani remarked, ‘It is permissible for the scholar to make taqlid of the one with more knowledge than him and it is not permissible for him to make taqlid of the one equal in knowledge to him’. The reason for the principle that it is not permissible for him to make taqlid of one of the same calibre is because of the length of time that he has and the the tools of ijtihad that he can use to make the ruling sought. In this case, it is not permissible for him to make taqlid of someone besides him as we have said of the matters of the intellect. Now if the time should be short and he believes that worship may be left if he spends much time in ijtihad, then there are two points to this matter: 1) It is permissible for him to make taqlid in that affair, 2) It is not permissible for him to make taqlid so long as he has the tools of ijtihad, so the ruling is the same as if he had plenty of time. It is said that this is the more correct of the two positions. Allah knows best. Abu Ibrahim al-Muzani said of this affair, ‘It should be asked of the one who makes ruling by taqlid whether he has proof. If he should say that he does, then he has nullified the taqlid, as the proof makes that compulsory for him to follow and not taqlid. If the person should say that it is by other than the proof, then it should be asked about the rulings on judicial punishments and rulings on the lives of people and the charity in wealth Allah has made all that impermissible then you have made it permissible without evidence. If he should say that he knows the proof and that if he does not know it he will ask his teacher, as he is from the senior scholars, and his opinion in the knowledge takes more precedence. Anything that he might say is only with proof that is hidden from me at the moment. It should then be said to to him that the taqlid of the teacher of your teacher is more befitting of taqlid than that of your very own teacher, as he does not speak except by the proof that has been concealed from your own teacher, and your teacher speaks of things and has the proof concealed from him. If he should agree to this, he has abandoned taqlid of his teacher to taqlid of the teacher of his teacher and, likewise, whoever is higher until he reaches the scholars from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. If he should refuse to do that, he has contradicted his own words. It should be asked of him how it is permissible for him to make taqlid of the one who is less than him and has less knowledge, and it is not permissible for him to make taqlid of one who is greater than him and has more knowledge? Is this not a contradiction? If he should say that the matter is because the person is his teacher and that even if he has less knowledge, he has gathered knowledge of those above him and added it to his knowledge, so he has greater insight and more knowledge of what has been left. It should be said that, likewise, whoever learned from your teacher, has added the knowledge of your teacher and the knowledge of those above him to his knowledge. It then becomes compsulsory to make taqlid of him and abandon taqlid of your teacher. Likewise, you have more right to make taqlid of yourself than your teacher, as you have added his knowledge and the knowledge of those above him to his knowledge, so by the words of this person mentioned he has contradicted himself. He has made the one who is less and speaks from the lesser in knowledge of the scholars greater than the taqlid of the companios of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and he put taqlid of someone less than a companion over them and the taqlid of the one who is higher, subservient to the one who is less, and this is the case in the analogy. He has made it necessary for whoever is correct to follow other than his teacher in the mistakes of his teacher, and he is mistaken in this matter regarding his teacher and his taqlid alone’.” Kitab al-Faqih wal-Mutafaqqih, vol.2, pp. 66-70. Thus, those who are not people of ijtihad of any calibre are obligated in this area to accept the evidence that the scholars have given, even though we do not know all the texts on the topic. One example is Consensus. Allah has indeed mentioned it in the Qur’an, And whoever contends with the Messenger after the guidance has been made clear to him and he who follows other than the path of the believers, We will hand him over to whatever he has turned to and We will roast him in the Fire. What an evil destination. Surat un-Nisa’ (4), ayah 115.

We know this is the case, but the scholars have given the verses and explained them in such a manner that means, if we ask them the evidence for an understanding (i.e. abrogation, the categories of strong, authentic, weak in Hadith science etc), they state that this is Consensus, but if we ask them for an explicit text upon that which they have all agreed, there is not one present, but just the general texts on Consensus. This goes back to what the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said of the scholars, “Whoever travels a path seeking knowledge, Allah makes him travel a path to Paradise. The angels spread out their wings in pleasure for the one seeking knowledge. Every creature in the skies and the Earth seeks forgiveness for the scholar, even the fish in the sea. The virtue of the scholar over the worshipper is like the virtue of the moon over the rest of the stars in the sky. Indeed, the scholars are the inheritors of the prophets. They do not believe behind any coin or measure of wealth, but it is the knowledge that they leave behind. Whoever should take hold of it, takes hold of much good indeed.” Musnad Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.16, pp. 70-71

[3] 541-620 AH (AD 1146-1223). He is Muwaffaq ud-Din Abu Muhammad `Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Qudamah. One of the Revivers of Islam in his time, scholar of fiqh, hadith, ihsan, math and many other disciplines, he is one of the highest voices of authority in the school of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Please see Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.4, pp. 105-119.

[4] 661-728 (AD 1263-1328). He is Abul `Abbas Taqi ud-Din Ahmad ibn `Abdul Halim ibn `Abdus-Salam ibn Taymiyyah. Born in Harran to a family of scholars, he learned from his father, Imam Shihab ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 682 (AD 1283) and read the books of his grandfather, Imam Abul Barakat Majd ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 653 (AD 1256), who is the second highest authority in the school and was the chief judge in Iraq. At a young age, Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah showed promise and studied with various scholars until he was given the title of Mujtahid Murajjih. A vast pillar of knowledge, he made restricted juridical reasoning in the creed and some areas of Consensus and was opposed by scholars from the schools. A quiet man who was known for his referencing, he was often pardoned due to his retraction of some of his positions that were divergent. Some of his more novel rulings include prophets committing sin, three pronouncements of divorce in one sitting being counted as one, the three categories of Tawhid  as well as rulings he passed against scholars of the Ash`aris and Maturidis, two groups within Muslim Orthodoxy. Scholars of the school sifted through his works and corrected the things in them, i.e. in books such as Al-Ikhtiyarat ul-Fiqhiyyah, Kitab ul-Furu`, Tashih ul-Furu` and others. It is in the best interest of the wise man to read these documents first, to know what can be kept or discarded from the works of Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah.


I had been hunting for more details on assistance with memorising Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi` by Imam Mansur Al-Buhuti (d. 1051)[1] and some students of knowledge had shared with me some possibilities for the affair. A few had asked, “Well, why are you memorising the Rawd. Just do the Dalil”.

So the argument opened up again (as friendly as it is!). There is a friendly discussion among students of knowledge and some scholars about the best text for memorisation when people look at mastering fiqh. One body is composed of the scholars of northern Arabia, Sham and half of Iraq. Their understanding is that the best text for memorisation is Dalil ut-Talib by Imam Mar`ii ibn Yusuf Al-Karmi (d. 1033).[2]

Before we lay out their argument, let us first look at the origin of the discussion. Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah (d. 620),[3] the great Palestinian sage and one of the Renewers of the Religion for his age, wrote a text known as the Sufficer.[4] This was his gathering together all the previous literature on the topic of fiqh and especially the Renewer of the Religion that succeeded the Imam and Shaikh, `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani (d. 561)[5] in the mastery of fiqh, namely Abul Fath Nasr ibn Futyan – known as Ibn Al-Manni.[6]

After the death of the Imam Ibn Al-Manni there were two main scholars that collected together the books before them, including Ibn Al-Manni’s and perfected the affair. They were the two great Imams, Majd ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 652)[7] and Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah (d. 620).

The former was a detailed writer and put together a systematic but brief approach to fiqh but it was not voluminous. In the latter’s case, he was more voluminous and detailed and wrote an entire curriculum in fiqh. The intermediate text, known as the Sufficer, was taken and commented upon judiciously by scholars down through the ages.

By the time of the 9th century, the great Palestinian Imam, `Ala’ ud-Din Al-Mardawi (d. 885)[8] had brought together two texts that fleshed out the Sufficer, one being the mammoth Way of Equity,[9] while the other was The Rectifier.[10]   

Then came the 10th century and the commentators of that period, Imams Musa ibn Ahmad Al-Hajjawi (d. 968),[11] a Palestinian and Taqi ud-Din Al-Futuhi (d. 972),[12] an Egyptian. They would add additional commentary notes on the Sufficer and also other statements of literature to flesh out meanings and give new insights when the newer issues of their time appeared.

Imam Musa Al-Hajjawi (d. 968) went one step further and summarised the Sufficer in his celebrated work, The Provision for the Seeker of Sufficiency.[13] This was not just a summary but also leaned back on the great Iraqi law scholar, Ad-Dujaili’s[14] text The Brief Exposition [15] to buffer it.

Then the 11th century came and there were the two stand out scholars of that time, Imams Mar`ii ibn Yusuf Al-Karmi (d. 1033) and Mansur ibn Yunus Al-Buhuti (d. 1051). Imam Al-Karmi took his own and Imam Al-Futuhi’s commentary on the Sufficer and summarised it and created a smaller text entitled, Dalil ut-Talib.    

Commentary works on The Sufficer/Dalili

Imam Al-Buhuti took The Provision and made a large commentary entitled, the Enclosed Meadow. After the time of Imam Al-Karmi came the commentary works upon from Imams Ahmad ibn `Awad Al-Mardawi (d. 1101), Salih ibn Hasan Al-Buhuti (d. 1121), `Abdul Qadir ibn `Umar At-Taghlabi (d. 1133) in his Obtaining the Means in Commenting upon Dalil ut-Talib,[16] Muhammad ibn Ahmad As-Saffarini (d. 1189),[17] Isma`il ibn `Abdur-Karim Al-Jarra`ii (d. 1202), Ahmad ibn Ahmad Al-Maqdisi (d. 1204) and Ibrahim ibn Duwayyan (d. 1353). And these are just main commentaries.

Cliff Notes on The Sufficer/Dalil

Next came smaller commentary works like Imams Ahmad ibn `Awad Al-Mardawi (d. 1101), Mustafa Ad-Dumani (d. 1194), `Abdul Ghani ibn Yasin Al-Lubadi (d. 1319), Musa ibn `Isa Al-Qaddumi (d. 1336), Salih ibn `Uthman Al-Qadi (d. 1351), `Uthman ibn Salih Al-Qadi (d. 1366) and Muhammad ibn `Abdul `Aziz ibn Mani` (d. 1385).

Smaller Rhyming Texts on the Sufficer/Dalil

Then scholars made smaller rhyming texts on the Dalil and they include Imams Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Al-Wa’ili (d. 1271), Ahmad ibn Ahmad ibn `Abdul Qadir As-Siddiqi (d. 1343), `Abdul Qadir Al-Qassab (d. 1360), Sulaiman ibn `Atiyyah (d. 1363), Sulaiman ibn Hamdan (d. 1397) and Musa Muhammad Shahhadah Ar-Ruhaibi, one of the students of Imam Ahmad ibn Salih Ash-Shami (d. 1414).

And there it is, in terms of the history of the text and its layout, commentaries, notes, rhyming texts that were smaller that fleshed it out. And it is due to this that northern Arabia, Sham and half of Iraq (and this includes the Hanbalis of Kuwait and northern Iran who actually came from Iraq) have chosen this text for judgement and the courts, scholars and the like fall back on it for commentary and use of day-to-day matters, not just merely pure worship. 

Adherents of the ‘Dalil is best’ understanding lay out their arguments in the following fashion:

Firstly, the sheer volume of literature in commentary on the Dalil, in both large commentaries and also smaller rhyming texts. This then stands to reason that the Dalil is the best choice for memorisation and not The Provision or The Meadow.  

Secondly, there has been more than three hundred years of fleshing out issues and resolving affairs from the Dalil and associated literature. Any ambiguity and the like has been removed.

Thirdly, the text is clearer and easier to work out rather than some cryptic statements that might appear in The Provision. And one of the points of a text for memorisation is clarity and easy use in memorisation. So the Dalil stands in the best position for this act.

These are indeed very convincing statements; but let’s look at the other end of the spectrum for the rank of the Provision by Al-Hajjawi (d. 968) as well as its commentary The Meadow by Al-Buhuti (d. 1051).

As was said, Imam Al-Hajjawi (d. 968) wrote the Provision as a summary of the Sufficer but also included Ad-Dujaili’s (d. 732) Exposition as a big influence. Now understand that this summary spread through most of Arabia, Egypt, big portions of Iraq and most of the Gulf region. And this was indeed the preferred text.

In fact, when the Imam, Sulaiman ibn `Ali Al-Musharraf (d. 1079)[18] found that Al-Buhuti had written his commentary on the Provision, he burned his own copy and told his students to follow only that one alone. The fact that this is the preferred one should be indicative of how high in esteem students and scholars alike held the text. So let’s talk about this some more.

First: the literature on the Provision is very lengthy as well.

Commentary works on The Provision/Meadow

There is a commentary on the Provision by Burhan ud-Din Ibrahim ibn Abi Bakr Al-`Awfi’s (d. 1097) Bughyat ul-Mutatabbi` fi Halli Alfaz ir-Rawd il-Murbi`. The Imam of his time, Ahmad ibn ibn Manqur (d. 1125) wrote his Al-Fawakih ul-`Adidah fil-Masa’il il-Mufidah which follows the Provision quite closely.

Cliff Notes on The Provision/Meadow

This includes `Abdul Wahhab ibn Fairuz’s (d. 1205) notes on the Meadow, Salih ibn Saif ibn Ahmad Al-`Atiqi’s (d. 1223) notes on the Meadow, `Abdullah ibn `Abdul `Aziz Al-`Anqari (d. 1373) also wrote a cliffnote layout on the Meadow. We also have `Abdul Qadir ibn Badran Ad-Dumi’s (d. 1346) smaller commentary on the Meadow as well as another one by Ibn Dawayyan (d. 1353).

There is Ibn `Atiyyah’s (d. 1363) Al-Masa’il which examines the differences between the Provision and the Uttermost Boundary. Then there is also the same author’s Rawdat ul-Murtaad, which covers the most important issues of the Provision, takes Al-Buhuti’s commentary notes and shrinks all of this down into a versified poem spanning 1091 lines.

Second: since Al-Hajjawi (d. 968) wrote the Provision and Al-Buhuti (d. 1051) wrote his commentary, there have been ample commentaries and discussion on the texts together. In some instances, the Meadow is seen as a text and not just the Provision alone. And this is the reason for the commentaries on the Meadow being given added attention.

Third: although some passages of the Provision by themselves are more cryptic, together with the Meadows the problem is solved. In addition to this, far more issues are covered and resolved in the Meadow than its rival and there are no rare issues listed (and Al-Hajjawi asserts this to be the case at the beginning of the Provision).

Fourth: Al-Buhuti (d. 1051) has preference over Al-Karmi (d. 1033) in consideration of rulings and thus it makes more sense to study Al-Buhuti’s works as he has done and published far more.

Fifth: the Meadow is a doorway to all the other texts on the topic by the same author.

Sixth: Al-Azhar has put together a three-volume curriculum that is more expansive and user friendly than the one it collected for Al-Karmi’s work, which would obviously give it higher rank.

Seven: this text, along with the rest of Al-Buhuti’s works, are what is dominant in the Gulf countries, Arabia proper and other locations so it would make more sense to make use of the text as it is more popularly spread.

Eight: this is one of Al-Buhuti’s final works, his final being the `Umdat ut-Talib, which was written about six months before his death and follows along the same track as his Meadow.

Nine: Although it might appear to have fewer commentaries, this is because fewer things needed to be fleshed out on account of how detailed the first commentary was in the first place. All other comments on the texts have tended to deal with footnotes, cliffnotes and other affairs. There are countless advantages to the Meadow that simply cannot be denied.

Ten: the text in print is almost always on yellow paper, which aids for it being easy on the eyes.

Eleven: it has a flow and cadence that makes it FAR easier to memorise.

And it is this that leads me to today’s book review. The book review is covering Hashiyat ur-Rawd il-Murbi`, a two-volume work written by the great scholar, `Abdul Wahhab ibn Muhammad ibn Fairuz At-Tamimi (d. 1205).

In terms of the topic, let us talk about the author first. He is none other than the Shaikh, the Imam, the high ranking and senior scholar, `Abdul Wahhab ibn Muhammad ibn Fairuz Al-Wuhabi At-Tamimi.

The historian and Qadi, Muhammad ibn Humaid An-Najdi (d. 1295),[19] may Allah have mercy upon him, said of him:

عبد الوهاب بن محمد بن عبد الله بن فيروز التميمي الأحسائي. ولد قبيل الظهر يوم الثلاثاء غرة جمادى الآخرة 1172، وأخذ عن والده من صغره فقرأ عليه الحديث ومصطلحه والأصلين، والنحو، والمعاني والبيان، والمنطق، والفقه والقرائض، والحساب، الجبر، والمقابلة، والهيئة, وغير ذلك،

He is `Abdul Wahhab ibn Muhammad ibn `Abdullah ibn Fairuz At-Tamimi Al-Ahsa’ii. He was born at the time of Zuhr, Tuesday at the onset of Jumada Al-Akhirah 1172. He took knowledge from his father[20] in his early years and recited hadith, terminology of hadith and the Book and Sunnah, grammar, expression, public speaking, logic, fiqh, inheritance, general math with engineering, algebra, science and other things besides that.

وأخذ أيضًا الحساب عن

العلامة السيد عبد الرحمن الزواوي المالكي وأخذ النحو عن الشيخ عيسى بن مطلق، وكان عنده أعز من أبنائه ومهر في جميع ما قرأ، وبهر في الفهم حتى فاق أقرانه

He also took general math and engineering from the scholar, As-Sayyid `Abdur-Rahman Az-Zawaawi Al-Maliki. He took grammar from the Shaikh, `Isa ibn `Abdullah ibn Mutlaq[21] and he was occupying a higher position than the sons of the scholar and he mastered all of what he read and excelled in comprehension of his time above that of his contemporaries.

فصار كثير من رفقائه تلاميذ والده يقرأون عليه، وكان ذا حرص واجتهاد إلى الغاية، قليل الخروج من المدرسة حتى إنه اتفق له سبع سنين لم يخرج منها إلا لصلاة الجمعة، وأما الجماعة ففي مسجدها، والأكل يأتي له من بيت والده مع الطلبة، وأكبّ على تحصيل العلم وإدمان المطالعة والمراجعة والمذاكرة والمباحثة ليلًا ونهارًا،

So he became from the most beloved of the students of his father and the students read to him. He strove hard and went to the furthest point of effort and ijtihad. He left only a little bit from the Madrasah until he spent 7 years without having left from it except for the Jumu`ah. And as for praying in jama`ah, then this is in the masjid of the Madrasah. At the time of eating, it would be brought from the house of his father and he would eat with the students at the Madrasah. He spent his nights and days striving to obtain knowledge and was always reviewing, revising, remembering and researching.

لم تنصرف همته إلى غيره أصلًا

And his intent never left from striving to perfect the knowledge.

حتى إنه لما تزوج بأمر والده وإلزامه أخذ ليلة الدخول معه المحفظة فلما انصرف عنه الناس نزل السراج وقعد يطالع الدروس التي يريد أن يقرأنها في غد، ويقدر في نفسه أنه بعد إتمام المطالعة يباشر أهله فاستغرق في المطالعة إلى أن أذّن الصبح، فتوضأ وخرج للصلاة، وحضر دروس والده من أولها، ولم يعلم والده بذلك لكونه لا يبصر، ولما فرغ من الدروس أتى إليه ولده وسلّم عليه فبارك له وبارك له الحاضرون،

This carried on until the time that his father ordered him to get married and he did so but the night that they came to him and the people pulled away to leave him with his wife, he had a lantern brought and sat going over his lessons so that he would have what he needed for review the next day. He carried on doing so by himself and intended that after he finished his review he would consummate with his wife. However, he became engrossed in his review to the time that the Adhan was made for Subh prayer. So he make wudu,’ headed out to Salah, attended the lesson of his father from the beginning. His father did not know he was doing that on account of the fact that he could not see. So when the lessons finished, his son would come to him, give salam and the father would bless him and so did the congregation.

وفي الليلة الثانية فعل كفعله بالأمس ولم يقرب أهله من غير قصد للترك، لكن لاشتغاله بالمطالعة فيقول في نفسه: أُطالع الدرس ثم ألتفت إلى الأهل، فيستغرق إلى أن يصبح، فأخبرت المرأة وليها بذلك، فذهب وأخبر والده بالقصّة،

So the second night the same thing happened as what had happened in the first instance and he did not go near his wife other than the fact that he wanted to be left alone but he busied himself with his review and said to himself: I will review my portion and then I will go to my wife. However, he again became preoccupied and the time for the Subh prayer came. It would be at that point that his wife would inform her wali of what had happened. The wali then went to the father and informed him of what had happened.

فدعاه والده وعاتبه وأخبذ منه المحفظة، وأكّد عليه بالإقبال عليها، وكان رحمه الله كثير التحرير، بديع التقرير، سديد الكتابة، قلّ أن يقرأ كتابًا أو يطالعه إلّا ويكتب عليه أبحاثًا عجيبة واستدراكات غريبة، وفوائد لطيفة،

The father then called his son, rebuked him and stressed to him the importance of going to his wife. `Abdul Wahhab ibn Muhammad – may Allah have mercy upon him – was one who spent a lot of time bringing forth researches, going over written principles, writing on detailed matters. Seldom did he read a book or review it except that he would write some wondrous or insightful points upon it as well as oft missed matters for the reader to ponder, and detailed benefits.

فمنها القليل ومنها الكثير، فمن أكثر ما رأيته كتب عليه “شرح المنتهى” للشيخ منصور ملأ حواشيه بخطه الضعيف المنوّر، فلم يدع فيه محلًا فارغًا بحيث إنّي جرّدتها في مجلّد، وضممت إِليها ما تيسّر من غيرها، وفيها فوائد بديعة، لا توجد في كتاب، وكذا رأيت “شرح الإقناع” و”التصريح” و”شرح عقود الجمان”للمرشدي و”شرح جمع الجوامع” الأصولي وغيرها وصنّف تصانيف عديدة، منها ما كمل، ومنها ما لم يكمل، لاخترام المنية له في سنّ الشبيبة،

Sometimes he wrote a little bit and then at times he would write a great deal. Must of what I saw him write was what he noted upon the commentary of the Uttermost Boundary by the Shaikh Mansur Al-Buhuti. He dictated some things down in very light but illuminated marginalia. He did not leave any page blank but instead he would put it in notes and these notations reached one volume. I looked at some of what he wrote and there were a number of benefits of noteworthy value that had not been present in the original work. I also saw his commentary on The Sufficiency,[22] the Exposition, Well Tied Ropes by Al-Murshadi, the Collection of All Collections in Foundational Principles by As-Subki[23] and other things. He wrote a number of works, some of them complete while others not so due to the onset of difficulties associated with old age.

فمنها “حاشية على شرح المقنع” وصل فيها إلى الشركة، وهي مفيدة جدًا، وممّا كمل “شرح الجوهر المكنون” للأخضري في المعاني والبيان والبديع،

Some of these works include his Cliff Notes on the Commentary on the Sufficer,[24] in which he reached to the Book of Partnerships.[25] And this was a book that was very beneficial. Then there was another text on the Commentary of the Preserved Gem [26]by Al-Akhdari[27] in analysis, public speaking and prosody.

ومنها “إبداء المجهود في جواب سؤال ابن داود” وذلك أن تلميذه الشيخ عبد الله بن داود

There is another in which he had notes on the[28] Exposition of the Ijtihad coming from the Questions offered by Ibn Dawud.[29]

سأله عن القول المرجوح وعن المقلد المذهبي، وعن الناقل المجرد، ومنها “القول السديد في جواز التقليد”،

And this came about regarding a question brought to him by his student, the Shaikh, `Abdullah ibn Dawud[30] who asked about the preferred statement and the taqlid of a madhhab and the transmission of a text from a verified authority.  And then there is another work by him entitled, The Decisive Word before the Deed regarding the Permissibility of Taqlid [31] that was penned.[32]

ومنها “زوال اللبس عمّن أراد بيان ما يمكن أن يطلع الله عليه أحدًا من خلقه من الخمس” وله قصائد بليغة ومقطعات عديدة،

There is also another work Lifting the Doubt regarding the one who wanted to clarify what is possible that Allah unveil to one of His Creation regarding the Five Matters of the Unseen[33] that he put together.[34] He also possesses rhyming texts and a number of other texts that use Arabic letters to rhyme and make poetry.

Imam Muhammad ibn Humaid An-Najdi goes on to say:

وتوفاه الله في مرضه ذلك في شهر رمضان سنة 1205 في بلد الزبارة ومن ساحل بحر عمان، ودفن بها، ورثي بقصائد شتّى من غير أهل مذهبه وبلده فضلاً

عنهم، وعظمت مصيبة أبيه به، لكنّه صبر واحتسب، وأتته التعازي والمرائي من علماء الشام وبغ وغيرهما.

Allah would take him back to himself due to an illness in the month of Ramadan in the year 1205 while in the land of Az-Zubarah not far off from the sea of `Uman and he was buried at that place. Much poetry and the like was recited for him even from people not from his madhhab and land as a blessing and favour from them. This was a great blow to his father but he was patient and remained steadfast. Those coming to give condolences and see the site include scholars from Sham, Baghdad and other locales. [35]

In terms of the work, it is exactly what it purports to be, a brief text that comments upon points laid out by Al-Buhuti. Without too much fanfare or lengthy introduction, the author heads straight into the topic and begins fleshing out meaty issues.

As I am memorising the Rawd after having completed hifz of Al-`Umdah, the yellow/golden paper is a handsome and easy-on-the-eyes aesthetic that eases the process of hifz. There is very little variation between Al-Buhuti and Al-Ahsa’ii and the line in the middle of the page for interlinear style is a welcome approach.

There are no intrusive notes and the only footnotes tend to be the hadith, ayah citations or listing manuscript variations. Neither the publishing house nor the editor has put anything superfluous into the text or the associated notes that belong with it.

Amazing points that will assist you

So here come the notes that should snatch your attention:

1): clear Arabic text without smudging

2): the notes are taken by the commentator and similar terminology is used so that it aids in hifz. You can tell this was the point of Al-Ahsa’ii

3): the commentator has kept the same order as the author as well as the headings

4): the commentator gives grammar points, permitted variations in the original work and permissible ways of reading the text and the subtleties that come with these readings

5): strong pedigree. The commentator comes from a long line of scholars and the text through examination can be seen to have been proofread or at least trialed with students of knowledge. Some of the answers to queries can be seen to have come from post or pre-lesson exchanges that students brought in the first reading

6): the constant insertion of the benedictions upon the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him into the text. This is useful for the one who holds doing so as wajib and is a good reminder for those who hold it as mustahabb.

7): the expression of the mu`tamad or depended upon ruling but also the second strongest statement in the event that the depended upon cannot be carried out

8): he explains the reason for disputes happening, the evidence depended upon by each side and the grammar utilised by each side in cases where it is appropriate.

9): the commentator gives the takhrij of the ahadith and even gives discussions on variances that may exist in individual manuscripts, the commentary citing the hadith and the hadith itself from the original manuscript. And on the same topic he gives some concise but useful jarh and ta`dil on certain narrators and the wording in the ahadith that are cited.

Drawbacks to the book?

Drawback #1: I don’t think this would be too much of a drawback but the notes only go up to the book of Waqf. This is not a problem but only one of the issues with the author dying before completing the topic. And as a side note, the rest of the text of Al-Buhuti is easier to memorise and also sort out so the absence of cliffnotes might not be too much of a loss.

Drawback #2: There seems to have been a battle between the editor and the publisher which from my side I am happy the publisher won as the editor had an agenda. It would appear that the editor had Salafi tendencies that he wanted to inflict upon the text along with numerous spelling errors and slips in attention to detail but the publishers detected this and halted it. In terms of the errata, they were judicious in pointing it out.

Drawback #3: For those that are beginning readers, there is no tashkil on the consonantal text thus one will have to have some knowledge of grammar or perhaps a teacher help with sounding out both the text and the commentary notes.

Drawback #4: The notes from the commentator leave you wanting more as they are so enticing and pregnant with meaning! Perhaps this is not a drawback but more of a desire.

So for the students of knowledge using this as a hifz manual for Al-Buhuti’s classic text or a reference manual altogether when doing research and fleshing out principles, this is a must have!

[1] d. 1051 (AD 1656). He is Abus-Sa`adat Mansur ibn Yunus ibn Salah ud-Din ibn Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn `Ali Al-Buhuti. Egyptian marja` and one of the depended upon sources in the Hanbali School in the later age, he studied with premier scholars of Sham, such as Imams Yahya Al-Hajjawi and others. He became the leading Hanbali scholar in Egypt, even outranking the senior Subki, Futuhi and Sa`di families in importance. He wrote five large works in fiqh and smaller texts on selected topics. The Imam, Sulaiman ibn `Ali (d. 1079 (AD 1674), when he learned that Al-Buhuti had penned his fiqh text, Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi`, burned his own text and told all his students in Najd to follow the Imam. Please see Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 472-474

d. 1033 (AD 1623). He is Mar`ii ibn Yusuf ibn Abi Bakr ibn Ahmad ibn Abi Bakr Al-Karmi. Considered by his peers to be a master of all sciences, this Palestinian marja` was the premier scholar of Egypt in his time but studied with the great scholars of Sham as well. Although concentrating his energies on creed and fiqh, he covered many of the most trying issues of his time, such as the widespread use of coffee and cigarettes. He was renowned as a defender of righteouness and an enemy to sin. cf. Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 463-467.

[3] 541-620 (AD 1146-1223). He is Muwaffaq ud-Din Abu Muhammad `Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Qudamah An-Nabulsi Al-Jamma`ili Al-Maqdisi. Renewer of his age, scholar, judge, jurist and expounder, he wrote some 200 or more books, touching on every subject in Islam. He learned from scholars of Iraq and Sham, combining both traditions successfully to bring about one of the greatest scholars the world had seen. cf. Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 52-54

[4] Ar. Al-Muqni`

[5] 470-561 AH (AD 1078-1166). Reviver of the Religion in his age and one of the two people in history to have permission to give rulings in all four madhhabs, he was a scholar of all disciplines but focused the bulk of his time on purification of the heart, theology and higher mind sciences. Please see Adh-Dhail `ala Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol. 3, pp. 244-253. 

[6] 504-583 AH (AD 1111-1187). He is Abul Fath Nasr ibn Futyan ibn Matar Al-Baghdadi. A great scholar of Iraq and teacher to multitudes, he is the teacher of most of the scholars of Sham and Iraq in his age with respect to the sciences of fiqh, theology and hadith. Please see Adh-Dhail `ala Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol. 3, pp. 301-307.

[7] d. 652 (AD 1266). He is Majd ud-Din Abul Barakat `Abdus-Salam ibn `Abdullah ibn Abil-Qasim ibn `Abdullah Al-Khidr ibn Muhammad ibn `Ali Ibn Taymiyyah Al-Harrani, also referred to as Al-Majd. The second highest voice in the school for canonical texts, he wrote his famous work, Al-Muharrar fil-Fiqh (Eng. The Consecrated and Recorded Matters Regarding Legal Rulings), which quickly became one of two foundational sets of works for cataloguing opinions and rulings of the scholars. Adh-Dhail `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.4, pp. 201-205

[8] 820-885 (AD 1417-1480). He is `Ala’ ud-Din Abul Hasan `Ali ibn Sulaiman ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad Al-Mardawi As-Sa`di As-Salihi. Judge, jurist, historian and grammarian, he was known for writing books on the narrations and debates within the Hanbali School. He organised the arguments under chapter headings, then acted as chief judge for most of his later life until his death. He wrote more than 20 books and was a mujtahid murajjih. Please see Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 76-81

[9] Ar. Al-Insaf fi Ma`firat ir-Rajih fi Madhhab Ahmad ibn Hanbal

[10] Ar. At-Tanqih

[11] 895-968 AH (AD 1490-1561). He is Abun-Naja Sharaf ud-Din Musa ibn Ahmad ibn Musa ibn Salim ibn Ahmad ibn `Isa ibn Salim Al-Hajjawi Al-Maqdisi As-Salihi. Hailed widely as a mujtahid, theologian, Shaikh ul-Islam, as well as the chief faqih of Sham, he wrote books and made fatawa that caused his fame to grow. Once he reached over the age of thirty, the scholars convened and declared him the source of authority for the school of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his time. The Imam did not rest at this point, happy with his achievement, but continued on, writing numerous texts, summaries and foundational works. One of these was Zad ul-Mustaqni`, which is a summary of the depended upon book Al-Muqni` by Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah (d. 620 AH/AD 1223). A simple yet effective summary, the document is the most widely used and commented summary of the book today. As-Suhub ul-Wabilah `ala Dara’ih il-Hanbabilah, vol.3, pp. 1134-1136

[12] 972 AH (AD 1565). He is Taqi ud-Din Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn `Abdul `Aziz ibn `Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Rushaid Al-Futuhi Al-Masri. Known as Chief Qadi, Shaikh ul-Islam, Imam Al-Futuhi was one of the greatest Egyptian Hanbali scholars to have ever lived. In his youth, he memorised Al-`Umdah, Al-Muqni`, Al-Kafi and scores of other texts. His first teacher was his father, Imam Shihab ud-Din Ahmad Al-Buhuti Al-Hanbali, and was also in the company of others such as Imams Ahmad Al-Maqdisi, and a host of others. As per the practice of the Egyptian Hanbalis, he then travelled to Sham and studied with the Hanbali scholars for a number of years and then returned and became the most knowledgeable in Egypt of the madhhab, not long after penning his masterpiece Muntaha Al-Iradat, a book that was so lauded, senior judges Mansur ibn Yunus Al-Buhuti and Mar`ii ibn Yusuf Al-Karmi commented on it in their works Daqa’iq Uwl in-Nuha and Sharh ul-Muntaha, respectively. Upon the death of Imam Taqi ud-Din Al-Futuhi, some scholars said that the madhhab died, as there was no one who brought about another legacy as rich as his own and that of his father. Fortunately, others such as Imam Mansur Al-Buhuti came after, and today we have some Subki, Futuhi and Sayyid families teaching the original methods and principles. Students of Imam Al-Futuhi included Shihab ud-Din Ash-Shuwaiki in Madinah and his student, Imam Musa Al-Hajjawi, who would later be the great judge of Sham. As-Suhub ul-Wabilah `Ala Dara’ih il-Hanabilah, vol.2, pp. 854-858  

[13] Ar. Zad ul-Mustaqni` fikhtisar il-Muqni`

[14] 664-732 (AD 1278-1346). He is Siraj ud-Din Abu `Abdullah Al-Hussain ibn Yusuf ibn Muhammad ibn Ad-Dujaili Al-Baghdadi. Born in a town near the Tigris River, he was a faqih, preacher, grammarian, teacher and author, he was known for righteousness and good conduct and was one of Baghdad’s premier scholars. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.2, pp. 417-418

[15] Ar. Al-Wajiz

[16] Ar. Nail ul-Maarib

[17] 1114-1189 (AD 1702-1775). He is Abul `Awn Shams ud-Din Muhammad ibn Ahmad As-Saffarini An-Nabulsi Al-Hanbali. Renewer of his era and one of the chief authorities of the Hanbali Legal School in his time, he learned from Grand Imams such as Muhamamd Hayat As-Sindi, `Abdul Qadir At-Taghlabi and others. He acted as judge and jurist for all of Sham. He wrote books in the field of comparative creed, fiqh, inheritance, manners, medicine and grammar. It was this noble scholar who received a letter of assistance from the scholars of Arabia against the Salafi Movement. He wrote five volumes of books against the group, the shorter and more famously known being, Questions and Answers Regarding Najd, which upon receipt by the scholars of Arabia became a rallying point for the Orthodox. Please see Muhammad Jamil Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, pp. 140-143

[18] d. 1079 (AD 1668). He is Sulaiman ibn `Ali ibn Al-Musharraf At-Tamimi An-Najdi. Chief Qadi and judge of Najd in the Arabian Peninsula during his life. Imam Sulaiman famously sat with Imam Mansur Al-Buhuti and learned most of his knowledge. Upon hearing that Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi` had been written, he commanded his students to burn his own fiqh books and use only Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi` and related texts. He had just ten students, but focused on advanced level studies, making them Qadis after him, including Imam `Abdul Wahhab ibn Sulaiman. cf. Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 173-174

[19] 1236-1295 (AD 1821-1878). He is Muhammad ibn `Abdullah ibn `Ali ibn `Uthman ibn `Ali ibn Humaid ibn Ghanim An-Najdi Al-Makki. Chief Judge in Makkah, he studied under some of its greatest scholars and in his travels gained knowledge from the Qaddumi and Shatti families. He suffered persecution, and directly witnessed atrocities and other trials under the Salafi movement, which was gaining more of a foothold in Makkah where he resided. He was the author of some ten books on various subjects. Please see Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 160-161.

[20] d. 1216 AH (AD 1801). He is Muhammad ibn `Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Fairuz at-Tamimi Al-Ahsa’ii Al-Hanbali. Born in Al-Ahsa,’ he was one of the torch bearers of truth against the organisation founded by Muhammad ibn `Abdul Wahhab. Imam Muhammad ibn Fairuz (as he is popularly addressed) studied with some of the brightest minds of his time, coming to hold double digit licenses in each of the eighteen sciences of Islam. There is no scholar of hadith in the era in which we live that does not have him in their chain of transmission. After continued opposition and hatred between the Orthodox scholarship and the Muwahhidun cult, the Imam was exiled from the city and fled to Iraq, not before seeing scores of scholars murdered or suffer the same fate as himself. Most of his works remain in manuscript form in libraries throughout the world, such as Princeton, Berlin, Chester Beatty and others. cf. Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 400-406

[21] 1179 (AD 1768). He is `Isa ibn `Abdur-Rahman ibn Mutlaq ibn Khamis Al-Maliki. One of the chief scholars of Al-Ahsa’, he was an enemy to Salafiyyah, firm in Religion and was strong against innovation and modernism that was trying to make an appearance. Born with diminishing division, he worked hard in the memorisation of the Qur’an, the Sahih of Imam Al-Bukhari and numerous texts. cf. `Abdul Qadir’s Tahfat ul-Mustafid, pp. 394-395

[22] Ar. Al-Iqna` , the author being Imam Musa Al-Hajjawi.

[23] 727-771 (AD 1327-1370). He is Taj ud-Din Abun-Nasr `Abdul Wahhab ibn `Ali ibn `Abdul Kafi As-Subki. Chief Qadi, historian, hadith scholar and specialist in fiqh who although born in Egypt in the capital city of Cairo moved to Damascus with his father. Coming from a long line of Egyptian scholars with roots in South Egypt, he left behind a large footprint in Usul, fiqh, history and a number of other areas. cf. Az-Zirkili’s Al-A`lam, vol.4, pp. 184-185.

[24] Ar. Hashiyat ur-Rawd il-Murbi`

[25] Ar. Kitab ush-Sharikah.

[26] Ar. Sharh ul-Jawhar il-Maknun

[27] 920-983 (AD 1519-1582). He is Abu Zaid `Abdur-Rahman ibn Abi `Abdullah As-Saghir ibn Muhammad ibn `Amir Al-Akhdari. Algerian specialist in many sciences of Islam, this high ranking judge, jurist and Sufi wrote a number of rhyming texts to assist students of knowledge in learning detailed matters of Islam. Tarjumat ul-Akhdari, pp. 19-20

[28] This came about because Salafis started to try to make a difference between “following the evidence” and being “madhhabi”. And as is typical, Salafis would use violence and death threats to try to spread the new religion. And this is in additional to their repulsive and repugnant theology in which they liken Allah with/to His Creation. As Imam Hasan Ash-Shatti (d. 1274) said, “May Allah curse whoever has this creed”. The Divine Texts, pp. 115-117

[29] Ar. Ibda’ ul-Majhud fi Jawab Su’ali Ibn Dawud

[30] d. 1225 (AD 1810). `Afif ud-Din `Abdullah ibn Dawud Az-Zubairi, Al-Basri Al-`Iraqi Al-Hanbali. Preacher, teacher, heresiographer and soldier, this particular scholar was born and lived most of his life in Az-Zubair, the great stronghold of Orthodox scholarship just outside Basrah. He studied under its premier scholars but decided to go to Al-Ahsa’ in Arabia to continue his studies. He learned from the scholars Muhammad ibn Fairuz and his son, `Abdul Wahhab. As-Suhub ul-Wabilah `ala Dara’ih il-Hanabilah, pp. 254-255

[31] Ar. Al-Qawl us-Sadid fi Jawaz it-Taqlid

[32] This issue was tackled because the cursed Salafi cult that was in Yemen and Arabia came and said that every common Muslim is obliged to be his own mujtahid and “follow the evidence” and that the madhhabs “contradicted the Book and the Sunnah.” So this text was crucial for dispelling some foolishness. As Imam Hasan Ash-Shatti (d. 1274) said, “May Allah curse whoever has this creed”. The Divine Texts, pp. 115-117

[33] Ar. Zawal ul-Labsi `Amman Arada Bayan Ma Yumkin An Yutli`ullahu `Alaihi Ahadin Min Khalqihi min Al-Khams

[34] And this work would break the back of fake Sufis (and is even applicable today) who claim their shaikhs have the knowledge of the Five Things of the Unseen and even some aberrant Sunnis today that try to insist that the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, possessed this, in spite of the fact that the First Three Generations never understood anything of the sort (!) How fitting it is that fake Sufis should have the grandshaikh, `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani say the following and destroy their sectarian diatribe:

“So Allah the Exalted said of the matter:

And what will make you know what is the Night of Power [Surat ul-Qadr (97), ayah 2].

“So it is as if He is saying, ‘Muhammad, if it was not that Allah taught you it and its grandeur, you would not have known it!’ So everything that is in the Qur’an with the expression ‘what made you to know’ (Ar. adaraaka), then Allah has indeed taught him what it was while the expression ‘what will cause you to know’ (Ar. yudareeka) then he did not know it and did not disclose to Muhammad the knowledge of it. An example of this is the statement of His, Mighty and Majestic,

And what will make you to know? It may be that the Hour is indeed near. [Surat ul-Ahzab (33), ayah 63]

“Thus He did not make it clear to him when its time was to come”. cf. Al-Ghunya, vol.2, pp. 261-262, Dar Ihya’ it-Turath il-`Arabi, Beirut, 1416 (AD 1996) [with editorial and prep. notes by Muhammad Khalid `Umar and Riyadh `Abdullah `Abdul Hadi]

As for the Five Things of the Unseen, they are mentioned by Allah, Exalted be He, in the following ayah:

Indeed Allah has in His Sight the knowledge of the Hour, what shall be sent down of weather, what is the wombs while no soul knows what it shall earn tomorrow and no soul knows in which land it shall be taken. Surah Luqman (31), ayah 34

[35] cf Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 277-279, Maktabah Al-Imam Ahmad (no date of print given)


( معيار الاجتهاد والتقليد )

The Pitfalls of Ijtihad and Taqlid

by Shaikh Faaris ibn Faalih Al-Khazraji

رسالة إلى طلبة العلم سواء من طلبة الدراسات العليا أو خريجي كليات الشريعة أو المعاهد المفتوحة .

This is a message to the students of knowledge, whether they be in the highest levels of learning, outside of the universities of the Revealed Law or the open institutes.  

المجتهد من شروطه أن يكون عالمًا بآيات الأحكام ومواضعها ومعانيها وطرق الاستدلال بها ، وكذلك السنة وتمييز صحيحها عن ضعيفها في أقل الأحوال تقليد إمام في ذلك والناسخ والمنسوخ منها ، ومواطن الإجماع ، ثم العلم بأصول الفقه ، واللغة العربية بنحوها وصرفها وبلاغتها على الأقل .

The mujtahid has conditions and one of them is that he is a scholar of the ayat of judgement, their application, means and ways of extracting evidential affairs using them. And  likewise there is the Sunnah, differentiating the sahih from the da`if in the smallest of incidents in taqlid of an Imam in that, knowing the nasikh and mansukh of it, the places where Consensus is established. Then after this comes Usul ul-Fiqh, the Arabic language – its grammar and morphology – with its expression that is lost on all but a few.

سل نفسك هل أنت ممن امتلك آلة الاجتهاد وشروطه المختصرة الذكر آنفًا ، والمبسوطة في كتب أصول الفقه ؟!.

So ask yourself: Are you someone who has the tool of ijtihad? Do you have the conditions laid out briefly just moments ago that are laid out in detail in the books of Usul ul-Fiqh?

فإن كان جوابك : أنك لم تمتلك أدوات الاجتهاد وشروطه فأنت عامي مقلد قولًا واحدًا لا خلاف بين العلماء في ذلك مطلقًا .

So if your answer is no and you do not possess the tools of ijtihad and its condition, then you are a layman, making taqlid and this is one statement and there is no difference among the scholars in that at all.

أما قضية مجتهد مسألة :

Now there is one point that needs expression on the topic of the mujtahid.

فهي خلاف ما يفهمه العامي أنه يجوز له الاجتهاد في المسألة الواحدة دون   امتلاكه لشروط الاجتهاد وتوافرها فيه ، وهذا مما لا خلاف فيه أيضًا ، فمتى ما امتلك شروط الاجتهاد يجوز له ان يسمي نسفه مجتهد مسألة . حينها يمكن لك الاجتهاد

So on this point there is a difference of what the layman understands in that it is permitted for him to make ijtihad on the one principle without possessing the conditions of ijtihad and encompassing them. And this has no difference of opinion in it. So when he possesses the conditions of ijtihad in that area, he can permissibly call himself a mujtahid of a matter and at that time it is possible for you to make ijtihad.

.فمعيار الفرق بين الاجتهاد والتقليد

But the pitfall is the difference between ijtihad and taqlid.

ما قرره الأصوليون من شروط للاجتهاد ، وما سوى ذلك مزاعم لا صحة لها لا في الواقع وقد تكون في ذهن صاحبها .وليعلم أن دعاوى القدرة على الترجيح والنظر هي دعاوى فارغة من المحتوى خاوية لا حقيقة لها .

What the scholars of Usul have established from the conditions of ijtihad is well known and whatever is besides that represents claims that have no validity to them or reality and it is merely something in the mind of the carrier of such thoughts. So let it be know that the claims to be able to join between and examine evidences while not being a mujtahid are empty claims that are devoid of merit and have no reality to them.

وليحذر طالب العلم مهما حصَّل من ألقاب فإنها لن تشفع له يوم القيامة فقد حذرنا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال القضاة ثلاثة : واحد في الجنة ، واثنان في النار ، فأما الذي في الجنة ، فرجل عرف الحق فقضى به ، ورجل عرف الحق ، فجار في الحكم ، فهو في النار ، ورجل قضى للناس على جهل فهو في النار » رواه عأبو داود.

Let the student of knowledge beware so that there does not result with him what has happened to others as there is no intercession for such a one on the Day of Resurrection. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “There are three types of judges, one in the Paradise and two in the Fire. In the case of (1) the judge in the Paradise, he is a man that knows the truth and gives judgement by it. Then there is (2)a man who knows the truth but transgresses in the judgement and he is the Fire. And there is (3) a man who gives judgement for the people while ignorant and he is the Fire.” Collected by Imam Abu Dawud.

فأنظر نفسك بين هؤلاء وسلها أي الأقسام انا .

So look into yourself among all of the categories mentioned in the hadith and ask, “Which of these categories do I belong to?”


فارس بن فالح الخزرجي

7 / 5 / 1442

This was written by Faris ibn Falih Al-Khazraji

7 Jumada Al-Uwla 1442


Imam Ahmad Salih Ash-Shami (d. 1414)

Did Imam Abu Ja`far At-Tabari (d. 310) have Shi`ii tendencies?

I don’t know. Perhaps we should take a look.

قال الصفدي في الوافي الوافيات ج 2 ص 214-213

 دار إحياء التراث العربي بيروت 1420ه

The historian As-Safadi (more about him later) makes this remark:

ولما قدم من طبرسنان إلى بغداد تعصّب عليه أبو عبد الله ابن الجصاص وجعفر بن عرفة والبياضي وقصده الحنابلة فسألوه عن أحمد بن حنبل يوم الجمعة في الجامع وعن حديث الجلوس على العرش فقال أبو جعفر أمّا أحمد بن حنبل فلا يعد خلافه فقالوه له: فقد ذكره العلماء في الإختلاف فقال: ما رأيته رُوي عنه ولا رأيت له أصحابًا يعوّل عليهم وأما حديث الجلوس على العرش فمُحال ثم أنشد الرجز: سبحان من ليس له أنيسُ ولا له في عرشه جليسُ

“…whereas At-Tabari arrived in Baghdad from Tabiristan, those who grew partisan to him include Abu `Abdullah ibn Al-Jassas, Ja`far ibn `Arafah and Al-Bayadi. The Hanbalis came to him and asked him regarding Ahmad ibn Hanbal on Friday in the Central Masjid and regarding the hadith of Enthronement. Abu Ja`far [At-Tabari] remarked, “In terms of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, he is not numbered among those whom his dispute is recorded”. The Hanbalis responded, “No, the scholars have mentioned him on matters of difference of opinion”. At-Tabari answered, “I don’t see anything narrated from him nor any of his Companions. As for the hadith of Enthronement, then it is not possibly correct”. Then he recited the following poetry:

Glory be to the One who has no equal

Nor any on the Throne seated[1] as an equal![2]

This exchange actually came after another one that he had had with one of the Imams of theology in Iraq his time, Abu Bakr ibn Abi Dawud (d. 310).

قال ابن الأثير في المامل في التاريخ ج7 ص 9-8 دار الكتب العلمية بيروت 1407ه

Ibn Abi Dawud mentioned that one of the statements that At-Tabari in a book was similar to the Shi`ii and At-Tabari decided to bring about the following circumstances as mentioned in a stroke of honesty by another historian, Ibn Al-Athir (more about his situation later):

وادعو عليه الرفض ثم ادعوا عليه الإلحاد

“So they accused him of Shi`ii tendencies, then they accused him of denying Allah’s Names and Attributes”.

وأما ما ذكره من تعصّب العامة فليس الأمر كذلك وإنما بعض الحنابلة تعصّبوا عليه ووقعوا فيه فتبعهم غيرهم ولذلك سببٌ وهو أن الطبري جمع كتابًا ذكر فيه اختلاف الفقهاء لم يصف مثله ولم يذكر فيه أحمد بن حنبل فقيل له في ذلك فقال: لم يكن فقيهًأ وإنما كان محدثًا فأشتد ذلك على الحنابلة وكانوا لا يحصون كثرة ببغداد فشغبوا عليه وقالوا ما أرادوا.

“As far as what was mentioned of him regarding the partisanship of the laity, the matter is not like that. It was only some of the Hanbalis that showed partisanship against him and fell into this issue and others besides them followed them in the affair. And that came about on account of the fact that At-Tabari gathered together a book in which the differences of opinion among the fiqh scholars was mentioned – and there was no book like this before – and yet he did not mention Ahmad ibn Hanbal. When he was asked about this, he said, “[Ahmad ibn Hanbal] was not a faqih. He was only a muhaddith”. This ignited the anger of the Hanbalis against him and they were an untold number in Baghdad. They moved against him and said that which they wanted”. (Al-Kamil fit-Tarikh, vol.7, pp.8-9, Dar ul-Kutub il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1407)

So from what we can see from here we notice that after their exchange, Imam At-Tabari reviled and lowered the status of the Imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, which triggered violence from some of the laity of the Hanbalis (among others) who threw ink wells and such that injured him in his head.

Why should this be a surprise? Anyone who reviles any of the First Three Generations has to expect nothing but something to happen. Most assuredly it is for the Qadis and those among them to make judgement about the individual’s penalty and the like however reviling one of the First Three generations is still reviling one of the First Three Generations. And he ultimately found what he was looking for and faced the outcome of the action.

What is most disgusting about today’s fake Sufis (especially the fake Qadiris) is that At-Tabari’s ending exchange is quoted but not what led to it. People are then given the canard that this statement was just said while he was calmly reading over some book or reviewing notes and it was a fact of history without any background to it. The bad adab and intentions of At-Tabari aren’t even mentioned.

These same diabolical deceivers don’t bother to even give the audience the full chain of events to let them make their own choice. So was At-Tabari a Shi`ii in tendency? It doesn’t appear to be so.

But he spoke out of line regarding Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the laity did what any laity would be expected to do whether it was the Companions, their Followers or their Followers. Didn’t the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, say, “A time will come in which the last of my Ummah will curse the first of it”.

The same thing goes for Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi (d. 463) who after falling out with some Hanbalis in Baghdad, decided not to number Imam Ahmad among the Fiqh Scholars of the early generations.[3]

In terms of Al-Wajiz by Imam Al-Ghazzali (d. 505), this is a Shafi`ii fiqh text, so what would be the purpose of why one would look for Imam Ahmad to be used in a madhhab specific text? Indeed, he was not mentioned in the introductory remarks but the rulings that are specific to his madhhab and followers are referenced under sections like Wiping Over the Khuff, Nullifiers of the Wudu’ and so forth. If they had no validity they would not have been cited as disputed matters. This is the fact, yet some duplicitous devils insist on pretending that there is some type of agenda or any other affair.

When discussing Ibn `Abdul Barr’s (d. 463) (الانتقاء في فضائل الثلاثة الأئمة الفقهاء مالك والشافعي وأبي حنيفة رضي الله عنهم) The Most Noble Merits of the Three Fiqh Scholars: Malik, Ash-Shafi`ii and Abu Hanifah and why Imam Ahmad is not mentioned, the answer is simple. His madhhab was not in Al-Andalus and so it had no presence to discuss with regard to rulings. This text was a comparison of Malik (the madhhab of Ibn `Abdul Barr) and the others that had a presence there.

When a presence was established, Imams such as Abu Ishaq Ash-Shatibi (d. 790) made reference to them in both fiqh[4] as well as theology[5] across a number of topics.

Then comes the interesting case of all the Hanafi sources that some quote as proof that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal was not a mujtahid or the like as they did not include him. They of course would not include him as they were primarily Imam Ahmad’s torturers during the Inquisition.

When the Mu`tazilah came into power in the era of Al-Ma’mun, they completely infiltrated the Hanafi madhhab to the degree that this became popularly known that Hanafis were Mu`tazilah. This would carry on for centuries. Let’s look at what Imam Ahmad said of the Hanafis of his time period:

Imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, who said of the Hanafis of his[6] time:

وأَصحاب الرأي: وهم مبتدعة ضلال أعداء للسنة والأثر يبطلون الحديث ويردون على الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام

The people of speculative opinion are innovators and astray. They are the enemies to the Sunnah and narratives through time. They nullify the hadith and reject the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

ويتخذون أبا حنيفة ومن قال بقوله إمامًا ويدينون بدينهم وأي ضلالة أبين ممن قال بهذا

They take Abu Hanifah and what he says as an Imam for themselves. They judge by their religion and each type of astrayness and who can be shown to be more astray than the one who said the aforementioned.

وترك قول الرسول وأصحابه واتبع قول أبي حنيفة وأصحابه؟ فكفى بهذا غيًّا مرديًا وطغيانًا

Such a one has left the statement of the Messenger and Companions and followed the words of Abu Hanifah and his companions? One can be called astray, rejected and transgressing the bounds for making such a statement.[7] 

The Hanafis in the time of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal had been infiltrated by the Mu`tazilah and they went into the Abbasid government through the ijtihad of one of the students of Imam Abu Hanifah, Al-Qadi Abu Yusuf.

Furthermore, even the Shaikh, Abul Hasan Al-Ash`ari, may Allah have mercy upon him, discussed the innovators that were in the Hanafi School in the Muslim West:[8]

وذكر هارون بن إسحاق الهنداني عن أبي نعيم عن سليمان بن عيسى القاري عن سفيان الثوري قال: قال لي حماد بن أبي سليمان: بلغ أبا حنيفة المشرك أني منه برئ

Harun ibn Ishaq Al-Hamadani mentioned from Abu Nu`aim from Sulaiman ibn `Isa Al-Qari from Sufyan Ath-Thawri who said: Hammad ibn Abi Sulaiman said to me, “Convey to Abu Hanifah the mushrik that I am disavowing myself from him”.

قال سليمان ثم قال سفيان: لأنه كان يقول القرآن مخلوق وذكر سفيان بن وكيع قال

It was mentioned by Sulaiman and then Sufyan Ath-Thawri said, “Hammad said these words as Abu Hanifah used to say that the Qur’an is created”. Sufyan ibn Waqi` mentioned:

سمعت عمر بن حماد بن أبي حنيفة قال اخبرني أبي: قال: الكلام الذي استتاب فيه ابن ابي ليلى أبا حنيفة هو قوله القرآن مخلوق. قال: فتاب منه وطاف به في الخلق.

I heard `Umar ibn Hammad ibn Abi Hanifah say, “My father said to me, ‘The speech someone is to have repentance taken from Ibn Abi Laila is that Abu Hanifah said that the Qur’an is created.’ So he repented from it and went around telling the people”.

قال أبي: فقلت له كيف صرت إلى هذا؟ قال: خفت والله أن يقوّم علي فأعطيته التقية.

My father said to him, ‘How could you do that?’ Ibn Abi Laila responded, ‘I was afraid – by Allah – that the people would come against me. So I gave them what they sought although it was by way of dissimulation or deception’.[9]

This is most likely coming from Mu`tazilah narrators within the Hanafi School at the time in Baghdad that Al-Ash`ari was exposed to and this explains the problems.

The Imam, `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani, may Allah be pleased with him, said of the Hanafis of his time:

وأما المرجئة ففرقها اثنتا عشرة فرقة: الجهمية والصالحية والشمرية واليونسية واليونانية والنجارية والغيلانية والشبيبية والحنفية والمعاذية والمريسية والكرامية،

The Murji’ah cult have twelve sects within them: (1) Al-Jahmiyyah, (2) As-Salihiyyah, (3) Ash-Shamariyyah, (4) Al-Yunusiyyah, (5) Al-Yunainiyyah, (6) An-Najjariyyah, (7) Al-Ghailaniyyah, (8) Ash-Shabibiyyah, (9) Al-Hanafiyyah, (10) Al-Mu`adhiyyah, (11) Al-Marisiyyah and (12) Al-Karramiyyah.

وإنما سموا المرجئة لأنها رعمت أن الواحد من المكلفين إذا قال لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله وفعل بعد ذلك سائر المعاصي لم يدخل النار أصلًا

They are called the Murji’ah on account of the fact that they claim that one of the people that has said: There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and after that commits all the acts of disobedience shall not enter the Fire at all.

وأن الإيمان قول بلا عمل، والأعمال الشرائع والإيمان قول مجرّد والناس لا يتفاضلون في الإيمان، وأن إيمانهم وإيمان الملائكة والأنبياء واحد لا يزيد ولا ينقص

They also believe that Iman is statements without action and actions are laws with Iman being words alone. The people have no distinctions in Iman and that their Iman and the Iman of the angels and the prophets is one that does not increase or decrease.

ولا يستثنى فيه، فمن أقرّ بلسانه ولم يعمل فهو مؤمن.

 They also do not take exception in Iman while to them whoever affirmed Iman with his tongue but then did nothing, he is classed as a believer.[10]     

In no way are Imams Ahmad ibn Hanbal, `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani and many other scholars denouncing the entirety of the Hanafi School.

Rather they were contending with elements within the School that were the predominant position for some five hundred years.

This would finally be resolved with the Seljuks and Ottomans who restored the valor and dignity to the long-sullied Hanafi School through their strident doctrinal orthodoxy and emphasis on orthopraxy.

These same superhistorians then forget the fact that the author of the sixth of the Sihah Sittah, Imam Ahmad ibn Shu`aib An-Nasa’ii (d. 302) made the following statement:

وبعد هؤلاء أحمد بن حنبل وإسحاق بن راهويه ويحيى بن أكثم

“And after these came Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ishaq ibn Rahuwaih and Yahya ibn Aktham”. [11]

But why go through all this hassle when we can just quote the elders of the early generations regarding Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s rank in fiqh?

Imam Muhammad ibn Idris Ash-Shafi`ii (d. 204/5) said the following:

أحمد بن حنبل إمام في ثمان خصال: إمام في الحديث، إمام في الفقه، إمام في القرآن، إمام في اللغة، إمام في الفقر، إمام في الزهد، إمام في الورع، إمام في السنة

“Ahmad ibn Hanbal is Imam in eight things: (1) Imam in Hadith, (2) Imam in fiqh, (3) Imam in Qur’an, (4) Imam in Arabic Language, (5) Imam in faqr, (6) Imam in zuhd, (7) Imam in wara` and (8) Imam in the Sunnah”.[12]

`Abdur-Razzaq As-Sana`ani (d. 211), may Allah be pleased with him, said of Imam Ahmad:

ما رأيت أفقه من أحمد بن حنبل ولا أورع

“I have not seen anyone more knowledgeable of fiqh and with more wara` than Ahmad ibn Hanbal”.[13]

Imam Yahya ibn Ma`in (d. 233) said of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal:

فقال: كان أفقه القوم

“He is the most knowledge of fiqh out of the people”.[14]

سئل أبو حاتم عن أحمد وعلي ابن المديني فقال:

Abu Hatim was asked about Ahmad ibn Hanbal and `Ali ibn Al-Madini and he said,

كانا في الحفظ متقاربين وكان أحمد أفقه

“They are close in memorisation but Ahmad is more knowledgeable in fiqh”.[15]

Abu `Ubaid Al-Qasim ibn Sallam (d. 224), may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

انتهى العلم إلى أربعة: أحمد ابن حنبل، وعلي بن المديني، ويحيى بن معين، وأبي بكر بن أبي شيبة، وكان أحمد أفقههم فيه

“Knowledge reached its apex in four: Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241), `Ali ibn Al-Madini (d. 234), Yahya ibn Ma`in (d. 233) and Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaibah (d. 256) and Ahmad was the most knowledgeable of them in fiqh”.[16]

So these are some SIX sources that have been quoted from the early ages that are contemporaneous to Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal or just after his age. Why would someone neglect to mention this after carrying out an a smear campaign against the Imam?

“Well, Abu Ja`far”, they wheeze while wringing their gnarled hands. “They just don’t know. Maybe they didn’t know about these sources”.

The fact of the matter is that they do know and these same people love to tout themselves as the

“Scholars of the Ummah”,

“Spokesmen for Islam in the West”

“Voices of Reason in the Ummah”

 and the

“Personal Imams and Advisors” to the government.

The fact of the matter is these people are theologically sick and this is shown through their spiritual sickness. If you can’t love the First Three Generations then you can’t be guided.

[1] In a grotesque twist, At-Tabari actually has a contradictory statement to this which will come up later in his own words. It then becomes a worry about whether As-Safadi or At-Tabari are both lying, telling the truth simultaneously or doing either. Perhaps this explains At-Tabari’s classification as sadiq by Adh-Dhahabi (Siyar A`lam in-Nubala’, vol.14, pp. 268-282) and not thiqah without restraint.

[2] As-Safadi’s Al-Wafi ul-Wafiyat, vol.2, pp. 213-214, Dar Ihya’ it-Turath il-`Arabi, Beirut, 1420

[3] cf. Ibn Al-Jawzi’s Al-Muntazam, vol.16, pp. 131-132, Dar ul-Kutub il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1412. This was immediately pointed out by Ibn Al-Jawzi (d. 597) yet no reference is made to this text or any other cross referencing by claimants to “the true Sunni path”.  

[4] [4] Al-I`tisam, pp. 16-17. This contains a glowing tribute to the preacher, the, the Memoriser, Imam `Abdur-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yahya ibn Ibrahim ibn Al-Walid ibn Mandah ibn Battah (391-470) who was a renowned Hanbali scholar (fiqh and creed) and the things he saw on his travels.

[5] Al-I`tisam, pp. 78-79. Here a statement is given by Imam Abu Bakr ibn Abi Dawud about the danger of injecting one’s opinion into Islam (!).

[6] And the Imam certainly knew the guided from the misguided as he learned from Imams Muhammad ibn Hasan Ash-Shaibani, Abu Yusuf Ya`qub ibn Ibrahim Al-Ansari, Waki` ibn Al-Jarrah and other direct students of the Imam, Abu Hanifah. So we know that for sure his condemnation was not of Imam Abu Hanifah or the entire school but what happened in his time in which most of the school was overwhelmed with this situation. In today’s Egypt, the situation is by and large the same as in the case of Mahmud Shaltut (Hanafi Mu`tazilah) and so many others.

[7] Please see Al-Hussain’s Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol.1, pp. 36-37.

[8] The Muslim West is from Iraq to Andalus.

[9] Please see Al-Ash`ari’s Al-Ibanah `an Usul id-Diyanah, pp. 56-57.

[10] cf. Al-Jilani’s Al-Ghunya, vol.1, pp. 126-127.

[11] Tasmiyat ul-Fuqaha’ il-Amsar, pp. 153-154

[12] Al-Minhaj ul-Ahmad, vol.1, pp. 8-10

[13] Al-Manaqib, pp. 95-96

[14] As-Sa`di’s Al-Jawhar ul-Muhassal, pp. 38-39

[15] Tahdhib ul-Asma’ wal-Lughat, vol.1, pp. 110-111

[16] Siyar A`lam in-Nubala’, vol.11, pp. 199-200


The grandson of the marja`, Imam `Abdul Ghani Al-Lubadi (d. 1319)

So who are the Mujassimah/Mushabbihah/Hashawiyyah?

The greatest theologian of the Ummah and the Imam of Ahl us-Sunnah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241) has said the following:

وأما الجهمية: فإنهم يسمون أهل السنة: المشبهة وكذبت الجهمية أعداء الله بل هم أولى بالتشبيه والتكذيب، افتروا على الله عز وجل الكذب، وقالوا الإفك والزور، وكفروا بقولهم.

“In terms of the Jahmiyyah, they name Muslim Orthodoxy to be Mushabbihah. The Jahmiyyah lie as they are Enemies of Allah. In fact they are the ones closest to likening Allah with the creation and lying. They lie upon Allah, Mighty and Majestic. They speak with falsehood and bear false witness and reject faith by their very words”.[1]

Hmmm. Let’s look further.

The Imam went on to say further,

وأما أصحاب الرأي: فإنهم يسمون أصحاب السنة: نابتة، وحشوية. وكذب أصحاب الرأي أعداء الله بل هم النابتة والحشوية، تركوا آثار الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم وحديثه، وقالوا بالرأي، وقاسوا الدين بالإستحسان، وحكموا بخلاف الكتاب والسنة وهم أصحاب بدعة، جهلة ضلال، وطلاب دنيا بالكذب والبهتان.

“The People of Speculative Opinion have named the People of the Sunnah as Nabitah and Hashawiyyah. The People of Speculative Opinion lie and are Enemies of Allah. Indeed they are Nabitah and Hashawiyyah. They have left the narratives of the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and his hadith and they speak with their speculative opinion. They make analogy in the Religion with what seems fear to them. They have made judgement to what contradicts the Book and the Sunnah and they are people of innovation, ignorant, astray, seekers of earthly favours by lies and false attribution”.[2]

Right. Well this tell us a great deal.

The philosopher and Shafi`ii Maturidi, Abul Fath Muhammad ibn `Abdul Karim Ash-Shahrastani (d. 548) said the following:

القاعدة الأولى : الصفات والتوحيد فيها وهي تشتمل على مسائل :

“The sects of Islam are built upon a number of major rules. There are four rules and in particular the great foundations:

الصفات الأزلية : إثباتاعند جماعة ونفياعند جماعة وبيان صفات الذاتوصفات الفعل وما يجب الله تعالى وما يجوزعليه وما يستحيل وفيها الخلاف بين الأشعرية والكرامية واجملسمة والمعتزلة

“Foundation 1: the Attributes and the Tawhid on the matter. This is in general to do with the Eternal Attributes that were affirmed by one group and then denied by another, as well as making a clear explanation of the Attributes of the Essence and the Attributes of the Actions and what is compulsory for Allah, Exalted be He, what is possible for Him and what is impossible for Him. There is dispute about this topic between the Ash`aris, the Kurramiyyah, the Mujassimah and the Mu`tazilah”.[3]

Hmmm. This is highly informative.

Ash-Shahrastani goes on to say:

وثار من الشبهة الثانية مذاهب : القدرية والجبرية والمجسمة حيث قصروا فيوصفه تعالى حتىوصفوه بصفات المخلوقي

“So the ambiguous and doubtful matter in the second place gave rise to the following groups: (1) the Qadariyyah, (2) the Jabariyyah, (3) the Mujassimah to the point that they fell short in the description of the Exalted One to the degree that they described Him with the attributes of creation”.[4]

Ash-Shahrastani continues:

فالمعتزلة : غلوا في التوحيد بزعمهم حتى وصلوا إلى التعطيل بنفي الصفات والمشبهة : قصروا حتىوصفوا الخالق بصفات الأجسام والروافض : غلوا في النبوة والإمامة حتى وصلوا إلى الحلول والخوارج : قصروا حتى نفوا تحكيم الرجال

“So the Mu`tazilah exaggerated in the matter of Tawhid with their claim until they reached the level of denial by repudiating the Attributes of Allah. The Mushabbihah fell short until they described the Creator with the Attributes of bodily form. The Rafidah exaggerated in prophethood and imamhood until they reached the level that some of them believed in incarnation. Then you have the Khawarij that have fallen short to the degree until they denied the judgement of men in cases of arbitration”.[5]

This should give you a good understanding of things when people go to question whether or not the First Three Generations and their successors had this understanding at all.

Historical accounts tell us that this is not the case with the First Three Generations nor those who came after Imam Ahmad that safeguarded the theology.

[1] Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol.1, pp. 36-37

[2] Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol.1, pp. 36-37

[3] Al-Milal wan-Nahal, vol. 1, pp. 10-11

[4] Al-Milal wan-Nahal, vol. 1, pp. 14-15

[5] Al-Milal wan-Nahal, vol. 1, pp. 14-15


Imam Muhammad Said ibn Muhammad Badran (d. 1435), brother of the current marja’, Imam Isma’il ibn Badran Ad-Dumi.

So in this current time, the same wickedness has reared its head and in the same fashion I have to distance myself from it and make sure that I stay in the third camp. Let us make this clear for all to understand.

I am neither Salafi/Wahhabi or what have you on one end of the spectrum nor am I Maturidi/Ash’ari on the other end of the spectrum. Both interpret the Names and Attributes of Allah and I am virulently opposed to this altogether.

In the case of Salafiyyah, they interpret them so that they are literal in order to insist that this is the case. On the other hand, those who interpret from the other camp do so in the declaration that they are “declaring Allah free from resembling His Creation and according to what befits His Majesty”. (this is almost a word for word account of what Salafiyyah claims).

The situation now that has come to my attention is that I have regularly been accosted regarding my theology (which has its antecedents in the First Three Generations) to the point that recently under a post by a venerable faqih, namely Shaikh Muhammad Jamil Ash-Shatti (d. 1379), I was asked if the early Hanbalis were those who likened Allah with His Creation.

This disgusting and evil intended “query” will be the last such one that I will countenance. I will now endeavour to make a more clear statement in distancing myself from affairs that are harmful to the main body of the Muslims (who are not invested in any of the battles that these groups so diligently chase after) who have been and are of the same theology as Imam Ahmad and the rest of the First Three Generations.

The root of this comes from none other than the missionaries of this thinking themselves. It is not isolated but something that is growing day by day and this same disgusting castigation of the greatest theologians this Ummah has ever known back to Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal continues unabated.

The most recent incident was this following below:

In this presentation (at the 2:02:50 mark in which I believe one of the “imams” takes a question on “hambaalees”) that was sent to me as a recommendation, the “imams” in this video decided to “proclaim the Creed of Ahl us-Sunnah” and in the process of doing so soiled themselves and launched a very sloppy and slovenly smear campaign against the great theologians of this Ummah.

There are atleast two of them that know better than to do something like this but in their cowardice they remained silent (to their detriment on the Day of Resurrection) and allowed this travesty and blameworthy behaviour to continue.

And it is this very vile, vitriolic and utterly despicable behaviour that inspires the indigent Slaves of Allah that leave me the messages in comments and e-mails.

And this is not all there is on the topic. There’s actually more!

The fact of the matter is we know that they are not reading through original, contemporaneous source material. They are only reading what they are told and what they have learned from their “shaykhs”.

And it is this that we intend to get to the bottom of before it is all said and done. This is being propagated, so we have to challenge it.

But they can’t help themselves, speaking things they don’t know about, so we’re going to help them and also resist the takfir on the greatest theologians this Ummah has known.

If you share these men’s opinions and baseless ideas, stay out of the way. I make no apologies for presenting the theology of the First Three Generations, in fact the only theology. All others are judged by how they match with it. This will not be a debate but a presentation like always.

And with Allah is every success.

Until next time,

Al-Hajj Abu Ja`far Al-Hanbali


Imam `Abdul Qadir Al-Hattawi (d. 1402), a figure of unity in the Religion.

So in the interim of dealing with the situation of the state of Muslims in the United States, Canada and the UK, we had to contend with a very strong contingent of cultists in the early ’90s. This in particular was Salafiyyah. It came and undermined brothers that had previously been of one accord.

Before their arrival, it did not matter what madhhab of fiqh we were. I ate with brothers who were primarly Malikis and Shafi’iis and some of us were Hanbalis (some of the fruit of the students of Shaikh Abdullah ibn Muhammad Al-Khulaifi and also others) and it made no substantive difference.

When Allah blessed us, we prayed together in jama`ah for tahajjud and also would go jogging after Fajr. In matters of theology however we were of one accord. We had no disputes and our theology was soundly based upon that of the First Three Generations and nothing else.

Up and down the West Coast were social programmes and also Zakat ul-Fitr drives in which the wealth from the Zakah was divided up, food was purchased and we went and distributed it.

I never remember a time, from my youth, all the way to before leaving the US that we did not distribute it in the form of food. Converts were slow but dedicated and grew maturely into upright believers.

Then Salafiyyah arrived. There came the takfir, the denouncing of the madhhabs (remember this is before the time that people would start making the distinction between creed and fiqh with statements like: “I am salafee in aqeedah but hanafee in fiqh” at this time if you were following a madhhab you were running COUNTER to Salafiyyah and you had “manhaj issues”).

The theology discussions went crazy and two Trinities were introduced to Muslim brothers: (1) in day to day life and (2) in creed. The first was Bin Baz, Uthaimin and Al-Albani. With respect to the second, it was the three Tawhids.

Then on the back of that came the discussion of Tawheed ul-Hakimiyyah as per the Jihad Fikrah and Shaikh Umar Abdur-Rahman. Is it three or four? Three or four? We insisted ONE.

It was not just this but Salafiyyah ruined people’s knowledge of fiqh and worship and it caused catastrophic effects. You were either upon Salafiyyah or you were one of “the callers to misguidance”. Then Salafiyyah started to fade as a new group came into the forefront. They weren’t Shi`a people (they started to get popular around the same time as Salafiyyah and it caused the whole Salafi/Shi`a rift. We choose the third option of neither and tribulations ensued).

This new group came in and started to demand that people follow madhhabs. When I visited the Bay Area, I saw that there was some return to the study of fiqh but much of it was hollow. The cult of the trinity of three and sectarianism was replaced by another thing. Introducing the new trinity.

Now everyone had to be Ashari/Maturidi/Sufi vs Salafi or nothing and we choose the third option, which was to not be part of it. This tore what had already been split into more pieces. The Zakat ul-Fitr drives had stopped, the da’awah had stopped (this is strange because they claimed to be calling people to the truth of Islam, just like Salafiyyah) to a trickle.

The converts that were coming in were in large butter like dollops but they were arrogant, violent in some instances and haughty to others that differed with them. All of a sudden, you had to have bai’ah to someone, had to be linked with this and that, had to make takfir on these groups (just like Salafis). Then another reality came into fruition: Ashari/Maturidi/Sufi vs AICP/Sufi vs Salafiyyah.

What the…? Marriages fell apart, brotherhoods were torn asunder. Those of us that had stuck to our guns found ourselves often on the rim with a confused congregation. “I am just trying to perfect my salah, akhi. What the hell is an anthropomorphist?” The brother asked surprised, not sure what the word even meant.

Imaginary enemies that were little more than shadows and phantoms were fought and for what? Nothing came of it. More people fell away. Then I left to go to ma’ahad, leaving the US and Canada (the same thing had reared its head in the Afghani community but I think their stridency kept it at bay; while in Mexico the people just wouldn’t allow it to get a foothold. This was in the Yucatan Peninsula many years ago so I don’t know what it is now).

It was in London. Those of us who were students of knowledge managed to just steer clear of it for the most part, although there were occasional flare ups. Then I became resident in a small city and it started there. People there theologically were of one accord, then it started.

This foolishness reared its head yet again. People theologically were of one accord and then the tribulations began. Now brothers started being divided up. I tried to stop it but was unsuccessful because the cavity had gone too deep. Now it was in the roots.

This same Ashari/Maturidi/Sufi vs AICP/Sufi vs Salafi ruined everything once again. And all the battling threatened to drag everyone into the mud. No one became anymore knowledgeable than they had been and instead they had regressed.


Figure 1A: The great scholar of hadith and fiqh, Shaikh Muhammad Bakr Isma`il (d. 1426), dressed in the fine decorum of a Muslim man.

Someone once asked Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah:

Some initiates of Tasawwuf gather together making Remembrance of Allah, reciting from the Qur’an, then they make supplication and remove their head coverings and make themselves humble while not intending by that any self display or fame; instead they do this as a way to gain nearness to Allah. Is this sound or not?

Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728) remarked:

“Praise be to Allah, Lord of all creation. Gathering together for recitation of the Qur’an, Remembrance of Allah and supplication is good and praiseworthy as long as one does not take this as a regular and continuous customary action that the people must do like the gatherings that are called for in the Revealed Law. And this gathering should not resemble those of the people of innovation.

“As far as removing the headcovering with all of this, then this is disliked, and especially when one is doing so at a time of worship or during an act of worship. This is the case as it is a wrong action and it is not permitted for one to seek to gain nearness to Allah in this way.” [Al-Fatawa Al-Kubra, vol.1, pp. 52-53]


Is marrying only one wife what is best?

Is it praiseworthy to only marry one wife and not engage in polygamy?


Imam Mansur ibn Yunus Al-Buhuti,[1] may Allah be pleased with him, said the following:

Yahya ibn Ja`adah narrated that the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “The best benefit that a man could be shown after his Islam is a beautiful wife that makes him happy when he looks at her, obeys him when he commands her and preserves his hidden matters when he is away regarding his wealth and his honour.” This is collected by Sa`id ibn Mansur.

It is praiseworthy that she be an intelligent and foreign woman to him. This will mean that the child will be intelligent and that if he is not there is no safeguard from Talaq and his going to near relatives and going towards cutting family ties when the command is to keep them.

And as marriage is for the intent of living together in harmony and maintainance, this is not realised with stupid or small minded women and this will not lead to a good life. It may be that this same stupidity is passed on to the child. It has been said, “Avoid the stupid women for her child will be a waste of time and her health will be a trial”.

And it is praiseworthy that he should not marry more than one as long as his his sexual needs and chastity are being preserved through being with her on account of the fact that the avoidance of the impermissible has already been achieved.

The Exalted One has said,

And you will never be able to do justice between the women, even if you should strive to do so.[2]

And the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Whoever has two wives and includes towards one other the other shall come on the Day of Resurrection with one side inclining.” This is collected by Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, An-Nasa’ii and Ad-Darimi.

Imam Ahmad once wanted to get married to both a free woman and a slave woman and said, “My desire is that they should both have a little bit of heft.” It has been said by some that one should seek out what type of hair the woman has as this will indicate whether her build is hefty or not.

Imam Al-Buhuti said further:

Thus marrying more than one wife is permitted as explicitly stated in Al-Hidayah and Al-Madhhab,[3] Al-Mustaw`ib,[4] Al-Khulasah,[5] Al-Kafi,[6] Ar-Ri`ayah – both the large and small editions[7]Al-Hawi As-Saghir,[8] Al-Fa’iq [9]and other texts.

This ruling is given precedence by the author[10] of Al-Furu` and the author[11] of Tajrid ul-`Inayah. The author[12] of Al-Insaf  said, “And this is the ruling of the School.”

[1] d. 1051 (AD 1656). He is Abus-Sa`adat Mansur ibn Yunus ibn Salah ud-Din ibn Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn `Ali Al-Buhuti. Egyptian marja` and one of the depended upon sources in the Hanbali School in the later age, he studied with premier scholars of Sham, such as Imams Yahya Al-Hajjawi and others. He became the leading Hanbali scholar in Egypt, even outranking the senior Subki, Futuhi and Sa`di families in importance. He wrote five large works in fiqh and smaller texts on selected topics. The Imam, Sulaiman ibn `Ali (d. 1079 (AD 1674), when he learned that Al-Buhuti had penned his fiqh text, Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi`, burned his own text and told all his students in Najd to follow the Imam. Please see Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 472-474

[2] Surat un-Nisa’ (4), ayah 129

[3] 432-510 (AD 1041-1116). He is Abul Khattab Mahfuz ibn Ahmad Al-Kalwadhani. The Imam was perhaps the greatest teacher of `Abdul Qadir ibn Musa Al-Jilani and stood shoulder to shoulder with the greatest scholars of the madhhab in his time. The khalifa of his time made him the chief Qadi for the Islamic world and often when scholars saw him, they would comment, ‘Here comes the law,’ referring to his penchant for enforcing justice. Imam Al-Kalwadhani saw no difference between prosecution for the rich or the poor.  But he was even handed, believing no one to be above the law. He left behind some 10 or more books in various sciences. Please see Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol. 3, pp. 97-106

[4] d. 610 (AD 1213). He is Nusair ud-Din Abu `Abdullah Muhammad ibn `Abdullah ibn Al-Hussain, known as Ibn Sunainah. Hailing the city of Rayy in today’s Iran, he was the author of books on inheritance, theology and poetry, his main accomplishment being gathering together some ten books within one for his amazing work, Al-Mustaw`ab, still considered a masterpiece. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Al Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.4, pp. 95-96.

[5] 519-606 (AD 1124-1207). He is Wajih ud-Din Abul-Mu`ali As`ad ibn Al-Munajja ibn ibn Barakat At-Tanukhi. One of the Shaikhs of the Hanbalis in his time, he narrated from Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah and left behind a considerable written legacy. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Al Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.3, pp. 49-50.

[6] 541-620 (AD 1146-1223). He is Muwaffaq ud-Din Abu Muhammad `Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Qudamah An-Nabulsi Al-Jamma`ili Al-Maqdisi. Renewer of his age, scholar, judge, jurist and expounder, he wrote some 200 or more books, touching on every subject in Islam. He learned from scholars of Iraq and Sham, combining both traditions successfully to bring about one of the greatest scholars the world had seen. cf. Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 52-54

[7] d. 695 (AD 1296). He is Najm ud-Din Abu `Abdullah Ahmad ibn Hamdan ibn Shabib ibn Hamdan ibn Shabib ibn Hamdan Al-Harrani. Specialist in fiqh, Usul, he is author of some five works and later taught in Cairo. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.3, pp. 271-272.

[8] 624-684 (AD 1227-1287). He is Abu Talib Nur ud-Din `Abdur-Rahman ibn `Umar  ibn Abil Qasim ibn `Ali ibn `Uthman Al-Basri Al-`Abdaliyari. High ranking scholar of his time, he was a student of Majd ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 652), memorised Al-Hidayah and other fiqh works. cf. Ibn Rajab’s  Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.2, pp. 312-313.

[9] 693-771 (AD 1294-1370). Known as Qadi Ibn Al-Jabal, he is Abul `Abbas Ahmad ibn Al-Hasan ibn `Abdullah ibn Abi `Umar Al-Maqdisi As-Salihi. Scholar of many disciplines, he authored a work on fiqh that summarized the rulings of the Hanbali School in bullet points as well as some six other books. He taught and lived his life on the famed Mount Qasiyun. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Al Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.4, pp. 372-373.

[10] 712-762 AH (AD 1311-1362). He is Muhammad ibn Muflih ibn Muhammad ibn Mufarraj Al-Maqdisi Ar-Ramini As-Salihi. Marja` of his time, scholar of many disciplines, he is the author of books on fiqh, theology, medicine and more in addition to be one of the authorised commentator’s on Al-Muqni`. He would later die and be buried at the foot of Mount Qasiyun. Please see Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah `ala Dara’ih il-Hanabilah, pp. 452-454.

[11] 750-803 (AD 1353-1406). He is `Ala’ ud-Din `Ali ibn Muhammad ibn `Ali ibn `Abbas ibn Fityan Al-Ba`li Ad-Dimashqi. Known as Ibn ul-Liham (or Laham), he became leader of the School in Sham along with Imam Ibn Muflih. He is the author of some five texts and summarised a number of tomes for easier application for students of knowledge. cf. Imam Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 309-310.

[12] 820-885 (AD 1417-1480). He is `Ala’ ud-Din Abul Hasan `Ali ibn Sulaiman ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad Al-Mardawi As-Sa`di As-Salihi. Judge, jurist, historian and grammarian, he was known for writing books on the narrations and debates within the Hanbali School. He organised the arguments under chapter headings, then acted as chief judge for most of his later life until his death. He wrote more than 20 books and was a mujtahid murajjih. Please see Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 76-81