Majmu' al-FatawaIbn Taimiya

and claim to follow his position. Neither group understood the subtlety of Ahmad’s words—may Allah be pleased with him.

Another group—including Abū al-Hasan al-Ashʿarī, al-Qādī Abū Bakr ibn al-Tayyib, al-Qādī Abū Yaʿlā, and others who say that they hold the creed of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the imams of Sunnah and hadith—said: “Ahmad and others disliked the expression ‘my utterance of the Quran,’ because lafz means throwing away and casting aside.”

Yet another group—including Abū Muhammad ibn Hazm and others who likewise say that they follow Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the other imams of the Sunnah—together with still others who affiliate themselves with the Sunnah and the school of hadith, claim to hold the creed of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and other such adherents of the Sunnah. Yet they have not understood what the imams of the Sunnah, such as Ahmad ibn Hanbal and others like him, actually taught. We have explained the statements of the early generations and the imams, including Ahmad ibn Hanbal and others, at length elsewhere.

As for al-Bukhārī and those like him, they are among the people most knowledgeable about the positions of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the other imams of the Sunnah. I have seen a group who affiliate themselves with the Sunnah and hadith—such as Abū Nasr al-Sijzī and others like him who refute Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Bukhārī—say that Ahmad ibn Hanbal used to declare: “My utterance of the Quran is uncreated.” They cited reports whose falsity is beyond doubt.

[The mass-transmitted reports from Ahmad ibn Hanbal, related by his two sons, Sālih and ʿAbd Allāh, and by Hanbal, al-Marwadhī, Qawzān, and others whose number Allah alone knows, make clear that Ahmad used to condemn both groups.]

(*)

Abū Bakr al-Marwadhī composed a work on this subject in which he recorded the statement of

(*) Shaykh Nāsir ibn Hamad al-Fahd stated (p. 66): “Qūzān” is a scribal corruption; the correct form is “Fūzān,” with an undotted rā’ (r). He is ‘Abd Allāh ibn Muhammad ibn al-Muhājir, Abū Muhammad, one of Imam Ahmad’s companions (d. 256 AH), as stated in Tabaqāt al-Hanābila, 2:43 (edited by al-‘Uthaymīn). In his footnote on this name, the editor writes: “Wherever this word occurs in this biography in (ط) [meaning the edition of Tabaqāt al-Hanābila edited by al-Fiqī], it appears as ‘Fūzān,’ with a dotted zāy (z). The same occurs in Tārīkh Baghdād, because both books had the same editor, Shaykh Muhammad Hāmid al-Fiqī—may Allah have mercy on him. He is undoubtedly one of our distinguished scholars, but this was an oversight on his part—may Allah have mercy on him. The error remained in both books, and everyone who subsequently edited the text using them followed their reading without careful consideration or examination. Ibn Nuqta stated: ‘With damma (u) on the fā’, sukūn (no vowel) on the wāw, fatha (a) on the wāw, and a final nūn.’ Similar descriptions occur in al-Tawdīh by Ibn Nāsir al-Dīn and elsewhere.” End quote. The scribal corruption found here is attributable to the copyists, for Shaykh al-Islām—may Allah have mercy on him—gave the name correctly on several occasions (see 8:407; 12:423–426).
وَيَدَّعُونَ أَنَّهُمْ عَلَى قَوْلِهِ وَكِلَا الطَّائِفَتَيْنِ لَمْ تَفْهَمْ دِقَّةَ كَلَامِ أَحْمَد - رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ -. وَطَائِفَةٌ أُخْرَى: كَأَبِي الْحَسَنِ الْأَشْعَرِيِّ وَالْقَاضِي أَبِي بَكْرِ بْنِ الطَّيِّبِ وَالْقَاضِي أَبِي يَعْلَى وَغَيْرِهِمْ مِمَّنْ يَقُولُونَ إنَّهُمْ عَلَى اعْتِقَادِ أَحْمَد بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ وَأَئِمَّةِ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ وَالْحَدِيثِ قَالُوا: أَحْمَد وَغَيْرُهُ كَرِهُوا أَنْ يُقَالَ: لَفْظِي بِالْقُرْآنِ؛ فَإِنَّ اللَّفْظَ هُوَ الطَّرْحُ وَالنَّبْذُ وَطَائِفَةٌ أُخْرَى كَأَبِي مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ حَزْمٍ وَغَيْرِهِ مِمَّنْ يَقُولُ أَيْضًا: إنَّهُ مُتَّبِعٌ لِأَحْمَدَ بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ وَغَيْرِهِ مِنْ أَئِمَّةِ السُّنَّةِ إلَى غَيْرِ هَؤُلَاءِ مِمَّنْ يَنْتَسِبُ إلَى السُّنَّةِ وَمَذْهَبُ الْحَدِيثِ يَقُولُونَ إنَّهُمْ عَلَى اعْتِقَادِ أَحْمَد بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ وَنَحْوِهِ مِنْ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ وَهُمْ لَمْ يَعْرِفُوا حَقِيقَةَ مَا كَانَ يَقُولُهُ أَئِمَّةُ السُّنَّةِ؛ كَأَحْمَدَ بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ وَأَمْثَالِهِ وَقَدْ بَسَطْنَا أَقْوَالَ السَّلَفِ وَالْأَئِمَّةِ: أَحْمَد بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ وَغَيْرِهِ فِي غَيْرِ هَذَا الْمَوْضِعِ. وَأَمَّا الْبُخَارِيُّ وَأَمْثَالُهُ فَإِنَّ هَؤُلَاءِ مِنْ أَعْرَفِ النَّاسِ بِقَوْلِ أَحْمَد بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ وَغَيْرِهِ مِنْ أَئِمَّةِ السُّنَّةِ؛ وَقَدْ رَأَيْت طَائِفَةً تَنْتَسِبُ إلَى السُّنَّةِ وَالْحَدِيثِ: كَأَبِي نَصْرٍ السجزي وَأَمْثَالِهِ مِمَّنْ يَرُدُّونَ عَلَى أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ الْبُخَارِيِّ يَقُولُونَ. إنَّ أَحْمَد بْنَ حَنْبَلٍ كَانَ يَقُولُ: لَفْظِي بِالْقُرْآنِ غَيْرُ مَخْلُوقٍ؛ وَذَكَرُوا رِوَايَاتٍ كَاذِبَةٍ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهَا؛ [وَالْمُتَوَاتِرُ عَنْ أَحْمَد بْنِ حَنْبَلٍ مِنْ رِوَايَةِ ابْنَيْهِ: صَالِحٍ وَعَبْدِ اللَّهِ وَحَنْبَلٍ والمروذي؛ وقوزان وَمَنْ لَا يُحْصِي عَدَدَهُمْ إلَّا اللَّهُ تَبَيَّنَ أَنَّ أَحْمَد كَانَ يُنْكِرُ عَلَى هَؤُلَاءِ وَهَؤُلَاءِ] (*) وَقَدْ صَنَّفَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ المروذي فِي ذَلِكَ مُصَنَّفًا ذَكَرَ فِيهِ قَوْلَ
(*) قال الشيخ ناصر بن حمد الفهد (ص ٦٦): و (قوزان) تصحيف، صوابه: فوزان: بالراء المهملة، وهو: عبد الله بن محمد بن المهاجر أبو محمد من أصحاب الإمام أحمد (ت ٢٥٦) كما في (طبقات الحنابلة) ٢/ ٤٣ (تحقيق العثمين) وقال في الحاشية على هذا اللقب: (وهذه اللفظة حيث ما وردت في هذه الترجمة في (ط) [يعني طبعة (طبقات الحنابلة) بتحقيق الفقي]: (فوزان) بالزاي المنقوطة، وهكذا في (تاريح بغداد)، لأن مصحح الكتابين واحد هو الشيخ محمد حامد الفقي رحمه الله وهو بلا شك من علمائنا الأفاضل، لكن هذا من سهوه رحمه الله، وبقي الخطأ فيهما واتبعهما كل من صحح عنهما دون روية ونظر. قال ابن نقطة (بضم الفاء، وسكون الواو، وفتح الواو، وآخره نون)، ونحو ذلك في (التوضيح) لابن ناصر الدين وغيرهما) اه. وهذا التصحيف الموجود هنا إنما هو من النساخ، فقد ذكره شيخ الإسلام رحمه الله مرارا على الصواب (انظر: ٨/ ٤٠٧، ١٢/ ٤٢٣ - ٤٢٦).

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies