as a refutation of the Hanbalīs, as this objector stated. Rather, he intended it—as he claimed—to refute some of them, specifically Abū ‘Abd Allāh ibn Hāmid, Qādī Abū Ya‘lā, his teacher Abū al-Hasan ibn al-Zāghūnī, and their followers. Abū al-Faraj did not undertake to refute the Hanbalīs as a whole, nor did he attribute to them what he condemned. Indeed, in opposing these men, he cites the statements of many Hanbalīs as evidence, including members of the Tamīmī family, such as Rizq Allāh al-Tamīmī, and Abū al-Wafā’ ibn ‘Aqīl.
Rizq Allāh inclined toward the approach of his predecessors, such as his grandfather Abū al-Hasan al-Tamīmī and his uncle Abū al-Fadl al-Tamīmī. Al-Sharīf Abū ‘Alī ibn Abī Mūsā was a companion of Abū al-Hasan al-Tamīmī. It is reported of him that he said:
“Qādī Abū Ya‘lā has indeed shat on the Hanbalīs—filth that water cannot wash away.”
We shall discuss this as Allah enables us, striving to speak with knowledge and justice. There is no power nor strength except through Allah.
There have always been Hanbalīs who incline toward a form of affirmation that another group among them rejects, while others refrain from both negation and affirmation. Thus, they experience the same kind of disagreement found among all other groups. Their disagreements, however, concern subtle points; as for the major principles, they agree upon them. For this reason, they have had less disagreement and division than other groups, owing to their firm adherence to the Sunnah and transmitted reports. In matters concerning the foundations of religion, Imam Ahmad has statements clarifying disputed questions that no one else possesses. His statements are supported by the Quran and Sunnah and by following the path of the righteous predecessors. Hence, all groups within the Muslim community that profess adherence to the Sunnah—its jurists, speculative theologians, and Sufis—profess adherence to him.