It is well known that Sufyān al-Thawrī was the most knowledgeable of this generation in hadith, besides his preeminence in jurisprudence and asceticism. Those scholars from Iraq and elsewhere who criticized the newly introduced opinion-based reasoning in Kufa did not direct that criticism at Sufyān al-Thawrī. Rather, they regarded Sufyān as the leading scholar of Iraq. Thus, Ahmad’s preference for Mālik’s school over Sufyān’s amounted to preferring it over the school of the Iraqi scholars. Imam Ahmad’s assessment of their respective knowledge of the Book, the Sunnah, and transmitted reports has already been mentioned, even though Ahmad ranked Sufyān al-Thawrī above all the other scholars of this generation and held him in the highest esteem. Nevertheless, he knew that the school of the scholars of Medina was closer to the Book and the Sunnah than that of the scholars of Kufa.

Ahmad was balanced and well informed, giving everyone their due. Thus, he loved al-Shāfi‘ī, praised him, prayed for him, and defended him against those who disparaged him or accused him of religious innovation. He would speak of al-Shāfi‘ī’s reverence for the Sunnah, his adherence to it, and his knowledge of the principles of jurisprudence, such as abrogating and abrogated texts, and texts requiring clarification and those whose meaning has been explained. He affirmed the authority of singly transmitted reports and recounted al-Shāfi‘ī’s debates in defense of the school of the hadith scholars against those who opposed it through opinion-based reasoning or other means.

Al-Shāfi‘ī used to say:

“In Baghdad, they called me the champion of hadith.”

Al-Shāfi‘ī’s virtues were many, as were his efforts to follow the Book and the Sunnah and to refute those who opposed them. He followed the school of the scholars of the Hijaz and had studied jurisprudence according to the approach of the Meccan scholars, the disciples of Ibn Jurayj