The Life Of Ibn Hanbal by Ibn Al-Jawzi

Recall—may God lead you aright!—that when faced with a difficult choice, the only way to discern the right course of action is to put personal feelings and partisanship aside and search systematically for the truth, without undue deference to the names and reputations of those involved. If you do this, the fog of perplexity will dissipate. If, on the other hand, you allow yourself to be led astray by your inclinations, it will be difficult to find your way back to the straight and narrow. 98.1

Note, then, that after examining the evidentiary basis of the Law and the foundations of jurisprudence, and delving into the biographies of those who exercised their faculties on behalf of the Law, I find our man to have been the most knowledgeable in those fields. 98.2

To begin with, he was active in the preservation and transmission of the Book of God. 98.3

[ʿAbd Allāh:] My father Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal taught me the entire Qurʾan by his own choice.530 98.4

Aḥmad himself read the text with Yaḥyā ibn Ādam, ʿUbayd ibn al-Ṣabbāḥ, Ismāʿīl ibn Jaʿfar, and others—omitting here the list of their authorities. When reading, he would not let the pronunciation of a approximate that of i, citing the Hadith: “The Qurʾan was revealed with a pronounced closer to u than to i, so recite it that way.” He would not assimilate adjacent letters except in the word ittakhadhtum (“you have taken”)531 and the like, as did Abū Bakr. And he would extend long vowels to a moderate extent.532

He also compiled works on the Qurʾanic sciences, including exegesis, abrogation, transposition, and the like, as we have noted in the chapter on his writings.

Turning to Hadith, there is universal agreement that he was unique even among his fellow exemplars in the sheer amount he memorized as well as his ability to distinguish the authentic from the dubious. Among earlier men of learning, Mālik knew more Hadith than anyone who came before him. To see that Aḥmad in turn outdid Mālik, one need only compare Aḥmad’s Authenticated Reports with Mālik’s Well-Trodden Path. 98.5

If asked, furthermore, about the reputations of Hadith transmitters, Aḥmad could list their virtues and defects from memory whenever he was asked as easily as he might recite the opening chapter of the Qurʾan. Anyone who looks at the Defects compiled by Abū Bakr al-Khallāl will see this immediately. None of his colleagues could match him in this respect, nor could any contest his mastery of the legal opinions, special virtues, points of agreement, and differences of opinion attributed to the Companions of the Prophet.

As for the study of the Arabic language, Aḥmad himself used to say, “I’ve written more Arabic than Abū ʿAmr al-Shaybānī.” 98.6

As for ruling on legal questions on the basis of analogy, Aḥmad has more feats of deductive reasoning to his credit than we have room for, but several examples may be found in the chapter on his powers of intellect. 98.7

In addition to all of these scholarly attainments, he had the force of character to renounce the world and impose on himself a scrupulousness that none of his fellows could match. No other scholar is described as declining with such unremitting severity the gifts offered by his friends as well as the emoluments dangled by the authorities.

Were I willing to risk the danger to their reputations, I could cite examples of gifts accepted by the other major figures and describe their willingness to relax their standards in such cases. Aḥmad, conversely, renounced even permitted things, as this book has shown in more than sufficient detail. 98.8

In addition to all of the above, Aḥmad proved himself capable of suffering great and terrible ordeals in the service of truth, a feat unmatched among his comrades.

[Al-Shāfiʿī:] Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan asked me who was better: his exemplar or mine?533 I asked him if he wanted to give each man his due or merely have a boasting match. He replied that he wanted a fair comparison. 98.9

“In that case,” I said, “tell me where your man excels.” “In the Book, consensus, sunnah, and analogy.” “Tell the truth now, with God as your witness! Who knows the Book of God better: our man or yours?” “Well, if I’m under oath, then it’s your man.” “What about the sunnah of the Prophet?” “Your man again.” “And the opinions of the Companions?” “Your man again.” “So what have you got left besides analogy?” “Nothing.” “And even there, we have better claim to using analogy than you. The difference is that we draw analogies on the basis of revealed texts so that the reasoning is clear.” The comparison here is between Abū Ḥanīfah and Mālik ibn Anas.

By reporting this exchange, al-Shāfiʿī saves us the trouble of debating with the partisans of Abū Ḥanīfah. Aḥmad’s superiority to Mālik is acknowledged, Aḥmad having learned everything Mālik knew and then added to it, as attested by any comparison of the Well-Trodden Path and the Authenticated Reports. Al-Shāfiʿī, for his part, was well versed in the various fields of learning but conceded Hadith transmission to Aḥmad; and Hadith is the pivot upon which legal reasoning turns. 98.10

[Aḥmad:] Al-Shāfiʿī told me, “You know Hadith better than I do. Whenever a Hadith turns out to be sound, let me know so I can adopt it.” 98.11

[ʿAbd Allāh:] I heard my father say, “Al-Shāfiʿī once said to me, ‘Aḥmad, whenever a report about the Emissary of God proves to be sound, let me know so I can use it.’” 98.12

[ʿAbd Allāh:] I heard my father say, “Muḥammad ibn Idrīs al-Shāfiʿī once said to me, ‘Aḥmad, you know better than I which reports are sound. Whenever you find a sound one, whether from Kufa, Basra, or Syria, let me know so I can adopt it.’” 98.13

Whenever in his book al-Shāfiʿī says, “I cite a trustworthy source” or “I heard a trustworthy source report,” he means my father.

This is why the book al-Shāfiʿī wrote in Baghdad is better argued than the one he wrote in Egypt.534 When he was here, he would ask my father, who would correct him; but in Egypt there was no one to catch him when he used a weak report. I heard my father say, “Al-Shāfiʿī learned more from me than I did from him.” [Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn Rāhawayh:] I heard my father say, “Al-Shāfiʿī never met anyone like Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal.” 98.14

[Aḥmad ibn Kāmil:] Several of Aḥmad’s associates told me that he used to say, “Al-Shāfiʿī learned more from us than we did from him.” 98.15

[Abū Ḥātim:] I’d give Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal precedence over al-Shāfiʿī. Being a jurist and not a Hadith expert, al-Shāfiʿī learned about Hadith from Aḥmad. He would often ask him, “Is this report strong? Do people know it?” If Aḥmad said it was, he would take it and build on it. 98.16

[Al-Athram:] Once when we were in al-Buwayṭī’s circle, he read to us, citing al- Shāfiʿī, that ablution with sand consists of two passes.535 But when I recited the Hadith where ʿAmmār quotes the Prophet as saying, “Ablution with sand consists of one pass,”536 he rubbed “two passes” out of his book and changed it to “one pass,” as in the report of ʿAmmār. 98.17

He also said, “Whenever you find a reliable account of the Prophet, prefer it to whatever I might have said. Adopt the Hadith and use it as if it had come from me.” [Al-Būshanjī:] I think of Aḥmad as more learned and more insightful than Sufyān al-Thawrī. After all, Sufyān never had to suffer an ordeal as terrible as the one Aḥmad went through. Also, Sufyān and the other local scholars of his time cannot have known as much as Aḥmad did, since Aḥmad knew what all of them knew put together. He also had a clearer sense of which of them transmitted accurately and which ones made mistakes, not to mention which were honest and which ones lied. 98.18

[The author:] The foregoing should give a clear idea of the scholarly preeminence that has persuaded so many to join Aḥmad’s interpretive tradition. Those of his associates who strive to know the Law do not merely imitate him. Rather, they act in accordance with the implication of his rulings. In doing so, they may favor one report of his view over another, and even choose a position that was never adopted by the original jurists of the school so long as it is consistent with the implication of his rulings. The position may thus be attributed to Aḥmad’s school only in the sense that it conforms to the general spirit of his statements. 98.19

What if partisans of Abū Ḥanifah boast that their exemplar knew some of the Companions? 98.20

There are two rebuttals. The first is to cite al-Dāraquṭnī, who said, “Abū Ḥanīfah never met any of the Companions”; and Abū Bakr al-Khaṭīb, who said, “He saw Anas ibn Mālik.” The second is to say that by that reasoning they should grant Saʿīd ibn al- Musayyab and others who did meet the Companions precedence over Abū Ḥanīfah.537

What if partisans of Mālik boast that their exemplar knew the Successors? 98.21

This claim is invalidated by reference to the Successors whom he met. Those Successors had known the Companions, and yet gave Mālik precedence over them.538

If they say, “Mālik is the repository of the knowledge of Medina,” then concede the point, but then say that our exemplar Aḥmad acquired everything Mālik knew and added to it.

What if partisans of al-Shāfiʿī boast that his lineage strikes close to that of the Prophet, who said, “Put Quraysh first and do not step out ahead of them; learn from them and do not presume to teach them”? 98.22

To this we reply that kinship does not entail giving him precedence over others in learning. Among the Successors, almost all the learned men were non-Arab affiliates of the tribes. These include al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī, Ibn Sīrīn, ʿAṭāʾ, Ṭāwūs, ʿIkrimah, Makḥūl, and others. By virtue of their great learning, they were perceived as having outdone those of their contemporaries whose nobility depended only on lineage.

People accepted what Ibn Masʿūd and Zayd told them and rejected the same claim when it came from Ibn ʿAbbās.539

As for “Put Quraysh first,” I refer you to Ibn al-Ḥarbī, who reports that Aḥmad was asked what it meant and said, “It means first in line for the caliphate. The phrase ‘do not presume to teach them’ is understood to refer to the Prophet.” Should they say that al-Shāfiʿī was faultless in his Arabic and therefore beyond reproach, concede the point, but then say that that does not give him precedence over others because precedence arises from how much one knows. Then again, he was caught making mistakes: saying, for example, “salty water” when the expression is “salt water”; or saying that allā taʿūlū540 means “that you not have many dependents” whereas specialists in language say it means “that you not incline”; or saying “if you call a dog” when he meant “if you sic a dog,” as the Arabs use the verb ashlā to mean only “call”; or saying “a robe that’s x,” even though the Arabs say “a robe that costs x.” According to al-Marrūdhī, on the other hand, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal never made mistakes when he spoke. 98.23

Should anyone say, “It’s been reported that Aḥmad recited Hadith on al-Shāfiʿī’s authority,” point out that al-Shāfiʿī was older. Not only that: al-Shāfiʿī himself would cite Mālik, who, according to al-Shāfiʿī’s partisans, should have deferred to him.

What’s more, al-Shāfiʿī reported Hadith citing Aḥmad, as we have seen. 98.24

Al-Buwayṭī said that he heard al-Shāfiʿī say, “Everything is in my books,” and a certain scholar explained that it came from Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal.541

The foregoing will, I hope, suffice to make our case. Let God be merciful to all, and to each his own.