[Abū Zurʿah:] Aḥmad held that one should not write down reports transmitted by Abū Naṣr al-Tammār, Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn, or anyone else who capitulated to the Inquisition. 77.1

[Al-Maymūnī:] I have it on good authority that he—meaning Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal —did not attend the funeral of Abū Naṣr al-Tammār. I believe the reason was al- Tammār’s capitulation to the Inquisition. 77.2

[Ḥajjāj ibn al-Shāʿir:] I heard Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal say, “If I were to transmit Hadith from anyone who gave in, I’d transmit from Abū Maʿmar and Abū Kurayb.” 77.3

[The author:] Abū Maʿmar’s full name is Ismāʿīl ibn Ibrāhīm al-Hudhalī and he capitulated under duress. He later regretted doing so, reproaching himself and expressing envious admiration of those who resisted. As for Abū Kurayb, his real name is Muḥammad ibn Abū l-ʿAlāʾ. After his capitulation he was given a stipend of two dinars. When he discovered that they were rewarding him for giving in, he renounced the stipend even though he needed it.

[Ṣāliḥ:] Al-Ḥizāmī came to see us after having been to see Ibn Abī Duʾād. As soon as my father went out and saw him there, he shut the door in his face and went back inside. 77.4

[The author:] He did the same with Abū Khaythamah, who came and knocked on the door. When Aḥmad came out and saw him there he shut the door and went back inside muttering angrily to himself. Abū Khaythamah, who could hear whatever it was that Aḥmad was saying, never came back.

When Aḥmad fell ill, Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn came to see him; but Aḥmad turned his back on him and refused to say a word. Finally Yaḥyā got up and left, grumbling, “After all that time together he won’t even speak to me!” [Al-Marrūdhī:] When Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal fell ill, Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn came to visit him. But Aḥmad, who had vowed never to speak to anyone who had capitulated, did not return his greeting. Yaḥyā began offering excuses, including the Hadith of ʿAmmār, and the verse «with the exception of one who is forced to do it, while his heart rests securely in faith.»459 Aḥmad’s only response was to turn his head away.

Finally Yaḥyā said, “I give up!” and got to his feet, muttering “It’s no use explaining anything to him.” 77.5

I followed him out and found him sitting by the door.

“Did Aḥmad say anything after I left?” he asked.

“He said, ‘I can’t believe he’s citing the Hadith of ʿAmmār! (The Ḥadīth of ʿAmmār runs as follows: “As I passed them, I heard them cursing you; and when I told them not to, they beat me.”)460 All they did was threaten to beat you.’” Finally I heard Yaḥyā say, “Go on, then, Aḥmad, and may God forgive you! Never on God’s green earth have I met anyone who knew His Law better than you.”

Someone might well ask why, if it can be shown that certain individuals capitulated under duress, which the Law allows, did Aḥmad end his relationship with them? There are three possible responses: 77.6

1. The persons in question were threatened but not beaten before they capitulated.

Threats do not count as coercion, as is evident from the aforementioned report about Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn.

2. Aḥmad may have ended his relationship with them in order to make a point: to show the common people what a heinous doctrine it was that the offenders had assented to and thus help the mass of believers stay on the right path.

3. Upon giving their assent, most of the offenders accepted payments and began associating with members of the regime. In doing so they went beyond what the Law allows and thus deserved ostracism and condemnation.

[Al-Marrūdhī:] From the time we entered Samarra to the time we left, Aḥmad tasted no cooked food or any fat. At one point he said, “That lot”—meaning Ibn Abī Shaybah, Ibn al-Madīnī, and ʿAbd al-Aʿlā—“have certainly been enjoying themselves.

I had no idea they were so attached to this world. How can they bring themselves to hang about palace doors like that?” 77.7

[The author:] One of the most damning things reported about Ibn al-Madīnī was that he recited a report transmitted by al-Walīd ibn Muslim, including a verbal error that al-Walīd had made, to Ibn Abī Duʾād in order to help his side argue for its point of view. This was one of the things that Aḥmad held against him.

[Al-Marrūdhī:] I told Aḥmad that ʿAlī l-Madīnī was reciting a report transmitted by al-Walīd ibn Muslim, citing al-Awzāʿī, citing al-Zuhrī, citing Anas citing ʿUmar, saying: “Leave it to its Creator.”461 77.8

“He’s a liar!” said Aḥmad. “Al-Walīd ibn Muslim’s report says ‘Leave it to its Maker.’” He added: “Al-Madīnī knows that al-Walīd made an error when he transmitted it. So why would he recite it for those people? Why give them a wrong report?” He thus declared al-Madīnī to be a liar.

[Qahm:] Ibn Abī Duʾād told al-Muʿtaṣim that Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal claimed that God will be visible in the afterlife even though the eye can perceive only finite objects.

When al-Muʿtaṣim asked Aḥmad to explain himself, he replied that he was citing the Emissary of God. 77.9

“And what did the Emissary say?” “I heard Muḥammad ibn Jaʿfar Ghundar report,” said Aḥmad, “that he heard Shuʿbah report, citing Ismāʿīl ibn Abī Khālid, citing Qays ibn Abī Ḥāzim, citing Jarīr ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Bajalī: ‘We were once with the Prophet on the fourteenth night of the month when he looked at the full moon and said, “You will most certainly see your Lord as clearly as you see the moon; you will not be cheated of seeing him.”’” Then he turned to Ibn Abī Duʾād. “What do you say to that?” “I’ll have to look into the chain of transmitters,” he replied.

This exchange took place on the first day of Aḥmad’s trial. After the session ended, Ibn Abī Duʾād sent for ʿAlī ibn al-Madīnī, who was then living in Baghdad without a dirham to his name. No sooner had al-Madīnī arrived than Ibn Abī Duʾād, without further ado, gave him ten thousand dirhams. Then he said, “That’s a gift from the Commander of the Faithful.” By his command, al-Madīnī also received the two years’ worth of stipends that were owed him. Then Ibn Abī Duʾād asked him about the Hadith of Jarīr ibn ʿAbd Allāh regarding the visibility of God.