Understanding Usul Al-Fiqh by Abu Tariq Hilal - Abu Ismael al-Beirawi

Imam Abu Abdullah Ahmad bin Hanbal (164 AH - 241 AH) was born and passed away in Baghdad. His mother and his uncle took care of him due to the death of his father when he was very young.

Baghdad at that time was experiencing a very strong intellectual movement, and was the capital of the Islamic State. It was residence for many scholars and intellectuals. It was in this environment that Imam Ahmad studied the Qur‟an, Arabic language, Hadith, the sayings of the Sahabah (ra), and the Seerah of the Prophet (saw). At an early age it was quite evident that Imam Ahmad possessed a very sharp and keen intellectual ability.

He was known to be very serious in his youth. At about 15 years of age, in 179 AH, he began studying and taking care of the Science of Hadith, under the tutelage of Qadi Abu Yusuf. In 186 AH Imam Ahmad began travelling to Basra, Hijaz and Yemen. It is reported that he went to Hijaz at least five times. In 187 AH he met Imam Shafi‟i in Makkah. In Yemen he took Hadith from Az-Zuhri and Ibn Musayeb.

A person once asked him about his busy travelling schedule and he replied; “I will keep my pen with me all the way to the grave.” He met Imam Shafi‟i again in Baghdad and studied in Imam Shafi‟i‟s Halaqah. Imam Shafi‟i said, “When I left Baghdad, I did not leave behind me a person more knowledgeable and better than Ahmad”.

Imam Ahmad came up at a very opportune time, in that he got a chance to read what was already documented by the great scholars before him such as Al-Aathar by Yusuf bin Qadi Abu Yusuf, the works of Muhammad ibn Hasan, Imam Shafi‟i and Imam Malik‟s Al-Muwatta. He was able to study Hadith, Sunnah and Fiqh all together. He collected 40,000 Ahadith in his famous book called Al Musnad. In this book he classified the Hadith based on the names of the Sahabah (ra) who reported them, as well as the Fiqh of the Sahabah (ra).

At the age of 40, he began his own Halaqah, although it was reported that before this he had already been issuing Fatwa. He used to give two Halaqahs, one was public and the other was for his students and his children. He used to instruct his students to write down the Hadith and did not encourage them to write down his Fatawa.

A man wrote a letter to Imam Ahmad asking him to debate with a person from the Muttakillimeen (one who practices „Ilm ul Kalaam). Imam Ahmad replied that he already had the chance to meet with those from the Muttakillimeen but he chose not to sit down with those deviant people. Imam Ahmad‟s opinion was that the Book of Allah had to be taken the way it was revealed.

Because of such a position, he was usually at odds and in direct confrontation with people like Mu‟tazilah, who at that time were supported by the Khaleefah Mamun. The Mu‟tazilah used to say that the Qur‟an was created and developed this opinion as a reaction to a position held by some of the Christians at that time.

A Christian during that time called Yuhannah Al-Damashqee used to instruct his followers that the best way to debate with the Muslims was to ask them about Allah‟s speech or word, and whether it was eternal or not. If they say it is eternal, then Jesus (Isa) would also have to be eternal since the Qur‟an says Jesus is Kalimat-ul-Allah, or Allah‟s word. If they say that Allah‟s speech is not eternal, then this would mean that Allah‟s speech was created.

Being influenced by this, the Mu‟tazilah began carrying the opinion that the Qur‟an was created, thinking that this would cut off any avenue that could lead to the conclusion that Jesus was eternal. This opinion was adopted by the Khaleefah Al Mamun in the year 212 AH, and in 218 AH Al Mamun began imposing this opinion on the people, enacting a punishment on those who would not say that the Qur‟an was created.

Imam Ahmad was one of the few people who stood fast in his opinion regardless of the punishment that he would face. He refused to say what the Khaleefah was trying to persuade him to say. When the people asked him why don‟t you just say the Qur‟an was created and you will be free from the persecution? Imam Ahmad replied, “Then how will the Ummah know the truth?” Imam Ahmad‟s opinion was that the entire issue was not one to be discussed since it was no more than a reaction to the Christians‟ debate, and that such an issue regarding the Islamic „Aqeedah was never discussed by the Prophet (saw), nor any of the Sahabah (ra). While discussing this issue with another scholar who followed the Mu‟tazilah opinion, Imam Ahmad said; “You are saying something that the Prophet, Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali never said. This could mean one of two things. Either you say they knew it and kept quiet, or that they did not know about it. If they knew and kept quiet then I will follow their opinions. If they did not know about it, then who are you to know something (regarding the Islamic „Aqeedah) that the Prophet (saw) did not know?” It should be clear here, regarding the opinion adopted by the Mu‟tazilah that the issue is not whether they were right or wrong, rather the issue is with regard to using „Ilm ul-Kalaam. Because of „Ilm ul-Kalaam, Muslims began debating issues that were once debated by the ancient Greeks and as a result, they lost a clear understanding of many issues related to the Islamic „Aqeedah. The Islamic „Aqeedah should be understood within the methodology of the Qur‟an.

This methodology separates between two Daleel, i.e. the mind and the conclusive texts (Qur‟an and Mutawatir Hadith). The mind is used to become convinced that the universe was created and is organised by Allah (swt); that Allah (swt) revealed the Qur‟an; and that there is a need for a Messenger to convey this Message and that Prophet Muhammad (saw) is the Messenger to whom the Qur‟an was revealed. Once we believe in these principles of the Islamic „Aqeedah, then the role of the mind is to understand the conclusive texts as they were given with regard to the angels, Jinns, the Day of Judgment and the hereafter.

We should not discuss any issue dealing with the Ghayb or the un-sensed with our minds. The correct way is to believe in everything that the revelation brought to us the way it is, without trying to change it, adding to it, deleting from it or twisting its meaning. This means that issues such as the Jinns, angels, and the attributes of Allah (swt) cannot be discussed based on our minds or intellect.

We cannot even describe the attributes or anything related to the entity or essence of Allah (swt). Because of „Ilm ul-Kalaam, Muslims started carrying certain deviant opinions and ideas regarding the Islamic „Aqeedah, which resulted in one of the many factors which led to the decline of the Muslim Ummah. It should also be clear that none of the four Imams ever got entangled in „Ilm ul-Kalaam‟.

Imam Ahmad did not document his Fiqh as did Imam Shafi‟i‟, and consequently his Fiqh was transmitted by his students. Imam Ahmad is said to have many opinions regarding an issue, and this caused some people to say that Ahmad was a Muhadith rather than a Faqih. It is important to note here that the varying opinions of Imam Ahmad were actually his quoting the varying opinions of the Sahabah (ra) without weighing one opinion against the other.

Besides being a great Faqih, he was a great scholar in the Sunnah. His title was Imam al Sunnah and the eliminator of Bid‟ah.

Well-recognised Hanbali scholars:

 Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi.

 Al-Khiraqi.

 Qadi Abu Ya‟la,.

 Ibn Taymiyyah.

 Ibn al Qayyim.

Ibn Taymiyyah (661 AH - 728 AH) was born in a family wherein both his father and grandfather were scholars of the Hanbali Madhab. Under the supervision of his father he memorised the Qur‟an, studied Hadith, and learned Hanbali Fiqh. After the invasion of Baghdad, at the hands of the Tartars, he moved to Damascus where he became engaged in various activities aimed at waging Jihad against the invading Tartars.

He is characterised as the one who rejected Taqleed or imitation; he never followed the Sufi approach and used to call for Jihad; and he used to call for Hanbali Fiqh, which often put him in direct confrontation with those who utilised other Fiqh.

He disagreed with all four Imams on many issues and used to be confronted because of it; however, he never compromised his position. He also tolerated the other opinions as long as they were based on the Islamic texts, even though they conflicted with his own opinions.

In his book, Al Fatawa, he wrote that Ahl as-Salaf had many opinions, even in the areas of „Aqeedah. Throughout his life Ibn Taymiyyah never tolerated injustice from any ruler and worked tirelessly for the complete and comprehensive implementation of Islam in the Islamic State.

It‟s unfortunate that some Muslims who promote the ideas and understandings of Ibn Taymiyyah make excuses for unjust rulers and their tools, the paid scholars. They do all this while claiming that they are following the example of Ibn Taymiyyah. If one really wants to follow Ibn Taymiyyah then one must follow his comprehensive approach to Islam. Quoting one sentence or opinion of Ibn Taymiyyah and using it as a generalisation for his entire life actually does a disservice in the presentation of the life of such a great scholar of Islam.