Academic literature on the topic 'Ahmad b. Hanbal'

Oposisi terhadap kalam dan Mutakallimun diklaim oleh sebagian besar peneliti sejarah teologi sebagai monopoli kaum Sunni (ahl al-sunna wa 'l-jama'a), terutama pengikut Ahmad b. Hanbal. Oposisi tersebut diklaim tidak pernah dilakukan oleh kelompok Shi'ah. Penelitian terhadap dua karya ulama Shi'ah abad ke-15, Ibn al-Wazir al-san'ani, memberikan antitesis (tentatif) yang bisa mengakhiri klaim akan monopoli tersebut. Penelitian terhadap isi, sumber, dan otoritas yang dirujuk Ibn al-Wazir dalam kedua karyanya tersebut membeberkan data baru bahwa kalam dan Mutakallimun mendapat cercaan dari sebagian anggota mazhab Shi'ah.

AbstractImam Ahmad b. Hanbal's repudiation of al-Hārit b. Asad al-Muhāsibī has long been noted by a number of contemporary works and of these, the contributions of Smith, van Ess, Abū Ġudda, al-Quwatlī, Melchert and al-Barr have all been productive. Most of these works, however, provide no more than a general overview of this dispute and there is a consensus of sorts—as many classical works would also suggest—that the reason for Ibn Hanbal's rejection of al-Muhāsibī was based on the latter's utilisation of scholastic theology (kalām). Although this appraisal may well be true, the exact nature of Ibn Hanbal's denunciation of al-Muhāsibī is far from straightforward. Indeed, upon a thorough examination of classical Arabic sources a variety of other possibilities emerge. Therefore, it is the goal of this article to examine such works to reconstruct the nature of the debate surrounding the dispute between these two renowned personalities of Islam's formative period and discuss the possible reasons behind the conflict that existed between them, so as to shed further light upon the historical and intellectual development of the early Muslim, scholarly community as a whole.

Selefî Hareketin Tarihî Kökenleri Ve Yöntem Problemi başlıklı bu makalede, özellikle Arap dünyası eksenli günümüz selefî akımların tarihsel kökenleri ve bağlantıları, başlıca bilgi kaynakları ve referans noktaları, faydalandıkları âlimler; Ahmed b. Hanbel, İbn Hazm, İbn Teymiyye, İbn Kayyim el-Cevziyye, İbn Kesîr, Emîr İsmâîl es-San'ânî, Muhammed b. Abdilvehhâb, Muhammed eş-Şevkânî, Şeyh Abdülazîz b. Bâz, Muhammed Nâsıruddîn el-Elbânî ve onların problemlere ışık tutan bazı görüşleri üzerinde durulmuştur. Aslında bir zihniyet, yaklaşım tarzı ve yöntem olarak selefîlik, tarihî kökenleri itibariyle erken dönemlere kadar uzanabilmektedir. Makalede, Selefî Hareketin Yöntem Problemi alt başlığı altında, selefî muhitlerin karşılaştıkları yöntem problemleri ve çözüm yolları, maddeler halinde metodik-akademik genel ilkeler hüviyetinde ele alınmıştır.<b>Historical Origions of the Salafi Movement and Problem of Methodology</b>In this article titled, Historical Origins of the Salafi Movement and Problem of Methodology, it has been examined the historical origins of the Salafi movement which are especially based on the Arabic world, historical relations of the contemporary salafi movements, their primary information sources and reference points, referred scholars such as Ahmad b. Hanbal, Ibn Hazm, Ibn Taymiyya, Ibn Qayyim al-Cavziyya, Ibn Kathir, Amir Ismail al-San'ani, Muhammad b. Abd al-Vahhab, Muhammad al-Shawkani, Shaykh Abd al-Aziz b. Baz, Muhammad Nasir al-Din al-Albani and some of their opinions concerning the problems. In fact, the Salafiyya as a mentality, manner of approach and method it may go the early periods from the perspective of historical origins. In this article, it has been also studied the methodological problems faced by the Salafi circles and the ways of solution in item by item under the subtitle of The Methodological Problem of Salafi Movement as methodological-academicals general principles.https://www.marife.org/marife/article/view/500

ABSTRAK&#x0D; Perceraian merupakan perkara halal yang dibenci Allah SWT. Jika terjadi perceraian maka akan ada masa tunggu/iddah. Imam madzahib sepakat bahwa perempuan yang diceraikan dengan talak raj’i berhak mendapatkan nafkah dan tempat tinggal selama masa iddah. Sedangkan untuk talak ba’in, mereka berbeda pendapat, Imam Abu Hanifah berpendapat istri itu tetap berhak atas nafkah dan tempat tinggal, Imam Malik dan Imam Syafi’i berpendapat bahwa istri hanya berhak atas tempat tinggal saja, sedangkan Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal berpendapat bahwa istri tidak mendapatkan hak nafkah dan tempat tinggal. Pendapat Imam Ahmad ini, memiliki persamaan dengan peraturan perkawinan di Indonesia, tepatnya pasal 149 b Kompilasi Hukum Islam, yang menyatakan bahwa, suami wajib memberikan nafkah, maskan dan kiswah kepada istri yang ditalak raj’i dan tidak untuk istri yang ditalak ba’in. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian pustaka (library research), dan berdasarkan studi ini perlu dipertimbangkan lagi hak istri pada dua jenis talak tersebut, Sehingga istri tetap bisa mendapatkan nafkah dan tempat tinggal selama masa iddah apapun jenis talak yang dijatuhkan.&#x0D; Keyword : Perceraian, Iddah, Imam Madzhab, KHI

In modern studies, the opposition to Sufism is often emphasized among the characteristic features of Salafis. However, in most studies, the boundaries of this contrast are not clearly drawn. At the point of understanding the Qur&rsquo;ān, this contrast is embodied in the subject of zāhir (obvious)-bātin (hidden), while the discussions of zāhir-bātin are mainly carried out around the story of Khidr-Moses. In this study, the Sufi analysis of Salafis will be discussed first. Then, in the centre of the story of Khidr-Moses, the views on the distinction between zāhir and bātin will be given. Salafism is a modern phenomenon. In the background of this phenomenon, there are Ashāb al-hadīth and Hanbali heritage. The views expressed by Salafis today are attributed to Ahmad b. Hanbal, the leading name of Ashāb al-hadīth, and his followers. In this respect, the opinions of some people who represent the Ashāb al-hadīth mentality in different periods, especially Ahmad b. Hanbal will be included in the study. Salafists give the impression that they express the ultimate truth in almost every subject they deal with. However, the scholars that the Salafis refer to as their ideas have put forward quite different views on many issues they deal with. These differences of opinion show that no one has the ultimate truth after the prophet&#39;s time. Demonstrating these differences of opinion with evidence on almost every issue can be considered a step towards getting rid of the monotony based on ideas and thoughts. Therefore, this study it is aimed to present the views of Ashāb al-hadīth and its intellectual heirs on the distinction between Sufism and zāhir-bātin in a panoramic way. At the same time, it has been tried to prove that the personalities that Salafists attribute themselves are not against mysticism and esoteric knowledge in the absolute sense. The primary method we follow in our research is the depiction method. Primary sources were first scanned for an accurate description, and the data obtained were transferred to the article by considering their internal consistency. Again, the chronology was followed to see the change in thought. Among the scholars who are the subject of our research, the first criticisms of mystics were expressed by Ibn Batta. Along with Ibn Aqīl and Ibn al-Jawzī, the focus of criticisms directed at Sufi circles is the bid&#39;ahs (innovations) seen in Sufis. The main complaints directed at Sufism and often reaching the dimensions of takfir (ex-communication) coincide with the post-Ibn Taymiyya period. Ibn Taymiyya denounces Sufis, especially Ibn al-Arabi, who brought a philosophical aspect to Sufism. After Muhammad ʿAbd al-Wahhāb, material and moral violence were applied to the Sufis by using the excuse of the honour they showed to the sheikhs or the tombs. On the other hand, none of the authors whose views we discussed was ultimately against Sufism. Both Ashāb al-hadīth and Salafis appreciate the early Sufis and welcome a spiritual experience to be lived in the centre of asceticism. In this respect, it can be said that the purpose of Sufi criticism is to draw the Sufis to the borders drawn with the literal indication of the Qur&rsquo;ān and Sunnah. From the earliest times, mystics saw kashf (intuition/insight) and ilhām (inspiration) as exceptional doors to the knowledge of truth and identified themselves with Khidr. Although Hanbali and Salafis disagreed about the identity of Khidr, they accepted that the information given to him was privileged. However, they argued that the knowledge given to Moses is superior to that given to Khidr. Therefore, they accept cash and ilhām as a source of knowledge, but they insistently emphasize that exploratory knowledge should be by the shari&#39;a&#39;s outward appearance (zahir).

Me'mûn, hilâfete geldikten sonra devletin geleceği açısından tehlike olarak gördüğü İslâm bilginlerinin toplum üzerindeki etkisini kırmak amacıyla Mu'tezilî eğilimli imamların da teşvikiyle Mihne sürecini dört aşamada başlatmak için harekete geçti. Üç aşamada halifenin görüşlerini benimsemeyen İslâm bilginleri, dördüncü aşamada ölümle tehdit edildiler. Me'mûn'un vefatıyla bittiği zannedilen Mihne dönemi, Mu'tasım'ın hilâfete gelmesiyle farklı bir boyut kazandı. İslâm dünyasında derin yaralar açan ve kısa süreli de olsa engizisyon dönemini anımsatan uygulamalara imza atılan bu dönemde baskı ve şiddete maruz kalan İslâm bilginlerinin başında Ahmed b. Hanbel gelmektedir. Halkın kendisine gösterdiği teveccüh sebebiyle Mu'tasım tarafından serbest bırakılan Ahmed b. Hanbel, Vâsık döneminde hayatını gizlenerek sürdürmek zorunda kaldı. Mütevekkil yönetime geldikten sonra Mihne uygulamaları bütünüyle ortadan kaldırıldı ve Ahmed b. Hanbel'e iade-i itibarda bulunuldu.<b>Ahmed b.Hanbel's Attitude Towards the Political Authority</b>After coming to caliphate Me'mun stepped into action to start the Mihna process in four stages with the encouragement of the Mu'tezilî biased imams with the aim of breaking the influence of the Islamic scholar who he considered as a danger regarding the future of the state. The Islamic scholars who did not adopt Caliph's ideas in the first three stages were threatened with death in the fourth stage. The Mihna period, which was thought to end with Me'mun's death, gained a different aspect with Mu'tasım's caliphate. It is Ahmed b. Hanbal who was exposed most to oppression and violence in this period when practices reminding inquisition era although for a short period and causing deep wounds in the Islamic world were performed. Ahmed b. Hanbal, who was released by Mu'tasım due to the public's favor towards him had to continue his life secretly during Vasık's era. Mihna practices were completely abrogated after Mutevekkil came to power and Ahmed b. Hanbal was rehabilitated.https://www.marife.org/marife/article/view/642

Bu makale erken dönem Selefî düşünce ile İbn Teymiyye'nin sistematik selefîliğindeki te'vil anlayışını tahlil etmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Selef kelimesi İslâmî terminolojide genellikle sahabe ve tâbiûndan oluşan ilk iki nesli ifade etmek için kullanılır. Geniş çapta kabul gördüğü üzere, bu iki nesil İslam'ın nasıl yaşanması gerektiği hususunda örnek addedilir. Nitekim İmam Gazâlî (ö. 505/1111) İlcâmu'l-Avâm adlı eserinde şunu kaydetmiştir: "Selef yolu sahabe ve tâbiûnun yoludur. Bu yolun yedi temel prensibi vardır". Ahmed b. Hanbel, Süfyân es-Sevrî, Evzâî, Mâlik b. Enes gibi erken dönem selefîler Ehl-i hadis diye de anılır. Diğer bir deyişle, Ehl-i hadis ve Selefiyye kavramları sıklıkla birbirinin yerine kullanılır. Geç dönemlerde İbn Teymiyye ile talebesi İbn Kayyim el-Cevziyye tarihsel süreçte mütekaddimûn ve müteahhirûn selefîlik şeklinde ikiye ayrılan selefîliği geliştirip güçlendirme yolunda çaba sarf etmişlerdir. İlk selefîler Allah'ın sıfatları konusunda ayrıntıya girmezken geç dönem selefîler bu konu üzerinde etraflıca durmuşlardır. Erken dönem selefîlikte ne Allah'a antropomorfik bir sıfat atfetmek ne de Allah'ın Kur'an'da kendine atfettiği sıfatları nefyetmek şeklinde bir tutum benimsenmiştir. Selefîlere göre Allah'ın bir sıfatını ispat/kabul etmek, O'nunla mahkukatı arasında benzerliği gerektirmez. Sözgelimi, "Allah'ın eli vardır" demek, bunun keyfiyetini ispat anlamına gelmez. Yine Selefîlere göre ilâhî bir sıfatın keyfiyeti hakkında nasıl sorusu sorulmamalı ve söz konusu sıfat, Allah'ın şanına yaraşır nitelikteki asıl manasından soyutlanarak çarpıtılmamalıdır.<b>On the Salafism and Ta'wil (Interpretation of the Qur'an)</b>This paper aims to analyze the concept of ta'wil (interpretation of the Qur'an) in early Salafi thought and Ibn Taymiyyah's systematic salafism. The word Salaf, in Islamic terminology, is generally used to refer to the first two generations of Muslims: the Sahabah (The Companions) and the Tâbi'ûn (The Followers). As it is widely accepted that these two generations are looked upon as examples of how Islam should be practiced. Actually, Al-Imam al-Ghazali (d. 505/1111) wrote in his book Iljâm al-Awâm; "The madhhab of the Salaf means the way held by the Sahaba and the Tabiûn. The principles of this madhhab are seven." The early Salafis, such as Ahmad İbn Hanbal, Sufyan al-Thawri, al-Awzai, Malik ibn Anas, are called as well Ahl al-Hadith (The People of hadith). In other words, the term Ahl al-Hadith is often used interchangeably with the term Salafiyya. In the late periods, Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728/1328) and his disciple Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751/1350) tried to enrich the Salafiyya madhhab, which later broke into two parts; the early Salafis did not go into details about the attributes of Allah. The later Salafis were interested in detailing about them. The early and the later Salafis altogether are called Ahl as-Sunnat al-khassa. The early Salafi position is to neither attribute anything anthropomorphic, nor deny that which God attributed to himself in the Qur'an. The Salafis would argue that confirming an attribute of God does not entail similarity with his creation. Confirming the attribute, such as the "hand" does not confirm its nature. They would argue that the nature of the attribute should not be questioned, distorted, divested of its intended meaning that befits God's dignity, nor resembled to his creation.https://www.marife.org/marife/article/view/502

Abstract Gadd, steve (Stephen K. Gadda), dms; b. Rochester, NY, 4/9/45. Uncle, who pl. bs. dm. in mil. band, showed him rudiments at age 7. Began serious stud. in 1957, having sat in w. Dizzy Gillespie at a local club a yr. earlier. Later stud. at Manh. Sch. of Mus. for two yrs. bef. sw. to the Eastman Sch. While there, pl. w. Chick Corea; Chuck Mangione; Gap Mangione; Joe Romano; Frank Pullara. After three yrs. w. an army band, he worked w. a bb in Rochester; in qt. w. Warren Bernhardt, Eddie Gomez, and George Young. To NYC ’72 in trio w. Tony Levin, Mike Holmes. Rec. w. Chet Baker ’74. Worked w. Stuff ’74–5; Corea ’75–81; Ben Sidran ’78. A founding member—w. the Brecker bros.—of Steps Ahead, he left it in ’81, then worked w. Masahiko Sato; Manhattan Jazz Qnt.; Joe Farrell; Herbie Hancock; Bob James; Steve Khan; Ron Carter; Roland Hanna; also w. Al Di Meola; Paul Simon; Stevie Wonder; Barbra Streisand; Paul McCartney; Aretha Franklin; Al Jarreau. Form. the Gadd Gang w. Ronnie Cuber, Gomez ’88. Pl. w. Corea qt. for Eur. fests. ’92; M. Petrucciani trio, in Eur., US ’97. Favs: Elvin Jones, Tony Williams, Jack DeJohnette, Buddy Rich, Louie Bellson. CDs: w. Baker (CTI); G. Benson; Weather Report (Col.); C. Bley (Watt); Brecker Bros. (Novus); Corea (Polyd.; Verve; Stretch); R. Cuber (Elec. Bird); E. Elias; E. Gomez (Den.); R.R. Kirk (Atl.); Manhattan Jazz Qnt. (PW; SB); D. Sanborn (WB); G. Washington (Elek.).