Addressing the Argument that Salafis Only Have Ijazahs Through Ash’aris

Below is a translation of sections from Ustadh Alaa’ Hasan’s article, Asānīd al-Ummah ‘an al-Ashā‘irah wa-Wujūd Fajwah Bayna Ibn Taymiyyah wa-Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhāb (Da‘wā wa-Niqāsh). I brought the sections together to form this article despite them appearing in separate sections in the original article.

Introduction:

One of the claims promoted by many contemporary Ash’aris is that the chains of transmission for the Islamic sciences, such as Quranic studies, Hadith, Tafsir, and Usul, were primarily conveyed through them. They assert that the transmitters of the religion in later periods were Ash’aris or, at the very least, those influenced by them. Even Hanbali jurists, they argue, were not free from Ash’ari stances in their writings. From this, the opponents conclude that the Ash’ari school must be the true path since they were the transmitters of the Islamic religion and that Salafis are merely an offshoot disconnected from the chain of transmission.

This argument is heavily relied upon by many contemporary Ash’aris. They do not support their stance with religious evidence to prove the validity of their school but rather claim that most later scholars were Ash’aris.[1] Thus, they suggest it is inconceivable that contemporary Salafi scholars—such as Shaykh Ibn Baz, Ibn Uthaymeen, and others—could be more rightly guided than figures like Al-Nawawi, Ibn Daqiq al-Eid, Ibn Hajar, and Al-Suyuti. They appeal to the general public’s emotions through this argument, as if this alone proves the correctness of their madhab!

Relying on People’s Ignorance Regarding the Authorities in Hadith Narration and Understanding:

Those who present this argument rely on people’s ignorance of the prominent figures in hadith narration and scholarship. Most eminent scholars in these fields, from the earliest periods up until the medieval era (roughly until the sixth century A.H.), were Salafis. The later scholars contributed to the Islamic sciences mainly through compilation, organization, and refinement. This is evident in the following points:

1. Later scholars narrate the majority of the chains of transmission for Sahih al-Bukhari through the copy of Abu al-Waqt Abd al-Awwal al-Sijizzi, a student of Abu Isma’il al-Harawi.

Abu al-Waqt al-Sijizzi said:

دخلت نيسابور، وحضرت عند الأستاذ أبي المعالي الجويني، فقال: من أنت؟ قلت: خادم الشيخ أبي إسماعيل الأنصاري، فقال: رضي الله عنه، قلت: اسمع إلى عقل هذا الإمام، ودع سب الطغام، إن هم إلا كالأنعام

“I entered Nishapur and attended the sessions of the scholar Abu al-Ma’ali al-Juwayni. He asked, ‘Who are you?’ I replied, ‘I am a servant of Shaykh Abu Isma’il al-Ansari.’ He responded, ‘May Allah be pleased with him.’ I then said, ‘Listen to the wisdom of this Imam and leave the insults of the ignorant, for they are nothing but cattle.’”[2]

ومعلوم أن أبا إسماعيل الهروي من أشدِّ الناس على الأشعرية، ولا شك أن صاحبه وتلميذه أبا الوقت السجزي كان مُجانبًا للأشعرية أيضًا.

It is well known that Abu Isma’il al-Harawi was among the fiercest opponents of the Ash’aris, and there is no doubt that his companion and student, Abu al-Waqt al-Sijizzi, was also opposed to Ash’arism.

2. The most renowned and authoritative version of Sahih al-Bukhari among later scholars is the edition compiled by the eminent scholar and hadith master, Sharaf al-Din al-Yunini al-Hanbali. He was a Salafi following the Hanbali school and a teacher of Ibn Taymiyyah, Al-Dhahabi, and others. Al-Yunini meticulously verified Sahih al-Bukhari, relying on several manuscripts as part of a significant project that consumed much of his life and scholarly expertise. He organized extended sessions with scholars to compare manuscripts and refine the text of Sahih al-Bukhari, resulting in what has become known among scholars as the “Yunini Manuscript.”

The Yunini Manuscript is one of the most important sources for Sahih al-Bukhari among all scholars. Al-Qastallani relied on it in his commentary “Irshad al-Sari.” The “Sultanic Edition,” printed by the Amiri Press between 1311-1313 A.H., was based on copies of the Yunini Manuscript. The subsequent edition, printed by the Amiri Press in 1314 AH, followed this model. More recently, an edition was published by Dar al-Sunnah in Mecca, based on the oldest and best-preserved copies of the Yunini Manuscript in eight volumes.

3. After a relative decline in the study of Hadith and its transmitters following the fifth century A.H., there was a revival in Hadith scholarship, marked by prominent figures such as Imam al-Hafiz Abd al-Ghani al-Maqdisi, who authored “al-Kamal fi Asma’ al-Rijal.” Following him, al-Hafiz al-Mizzi—a student of Ibn Taymiyyah—refined this work in “Tahdhib al-Kamal,” which was later abridged by al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi in “Tadhhib al-Tahdhib.” After all of them, al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani further refined al-Mizzi’s work with “Tahdhib al-Tahdhib” and made it more accessible through “Taqrib al-Tahdhib.”

Thus, the work of al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar was primarily one of compilation, organization, and refinement. He built his work upon the foundation of two prominent Salafi scholars: Abd al-Ghani al-Maqdisi and Abu al-Hajjaj al-Mizzi. To these, we can add al-Hafiz Shams al-Din al-Dhahabi, whom Ibn Hajar relied upon in his biographical and Hadith criticism works. Ibn Hajar said of him, “I drank Zamzam water to reach the level of al-Dhahabi in memorization,”[3] and he relied on him for critiquing narrators, describing him as “one of those who fully comprehended the critique of narrators.”[4]

The point is that the three individuals later scholars primarily relied upon and benefited from were all Salafis. Abd al-Ghani al-Maqdisi is well-known for his ordeal with the Ash’aris of his time; Al-Hafiz al-Mizzi was imprisoned twice, and Ibn Taymiyyah secured his release; and Al-Dhahabi is famous for being criticized by his student, Taj al-Din al-Subki, due to his inclination toward the Ahl al-Hadith. These three scholars are central to the sciences of hadith transmitters and the principles of criticism and validation (al-jarh wal-ta’dil) in the medieval period.

4. As for the sciences of Quranic recitation, Ibn al-Jazari relied on several primary sources in his work “al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-Ashr,” among them the book “al-Wajiz fi al-Qira’at” by Abu Ali al-Ahwazi. Ibn al-Jazari heavily relied on this work in his book. Abu Ali al-Ahwazi is also the author of “Dham al-Ash’ari,” a book that Ibn Asakir responded to in “Tabyin Kadhib al-Muftari.” Although scholars criticized al-Ahwazi for his excessive condemnation of Ash’arism, they nonetheless recognized his expertise in Quranic recitations and relied on him in this field.

Shams al-Din Ibn al-Jazari said:

وكان بدمشق الأستاذ أبو عليّ الحسن بن عليّ بن إبراهيم الأهوازيّ مؤلّف الوجيز والإيجاز والإيضاح والاتّضاح، وجامع المشهور والشّاذ، ومن لم يلحقه أحدٌ في هذا الشّأن

“In Damascus, there was the Ustadh Abu Ali al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Ahwazi, the author of “al-Wajiz,” “al-Ijaz,” “al-Idah,” “al-Ittidah,” and the compiler of the well-known and irregular readings, who was unmatched in this field.”[5]

He also said:

كتاب الوجيز: تأليف الأستاذ أبي علي الحسن بن علي بن إبراهيم بن يزداذ بن هرمز الأهوازي.. وَقَرَأْتُ بِهِ الْقُرْآنَ كُلَّهُ عَلَى أَبِي عَبْدِ اللهِ بْنِ الصَّائِغِ وَأَبِي مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْبَغْدَادِيِّ وَأَبِي بَكْرِ بْنِ الْجُنْدِيِّ”. ثم ذكر ابن الجزري إسناده إلى أبي علي الأهوازي

“The book “al-Wajiz” was authored by the master Abu Ali al-Hasan ibn Ali ibn Ibrahim ibn Yazdad ibn Hormuz al-Ahwazi… I read the entire Quran using this book under Abu Abdullah ibn al-Sa’igh, Abu Muhammad ibn al-Baghdadi, and Abu Bakr ibn al-Jundi.”

Then Ibn al-Jazari mentioned his chain of transmission leading back to Abu Ali al-Ahwazi.[6]

Al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi, after citing Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi’s criticism of al-Ahwazi, said:

يُرِيد تركيبَ الإِسْنَادِ وَادِّعَاء اللِّقَاءِ، أَمَّا وَضع حُرُوف أَوْ متُون فَحَاشَا وَكلا، مَا أُجَوِّزُ ذَلِكَ عَلَيْهِ، وهو بَحرٌ فِي القِرَاءاتِ، تلقَّى المُقْرِئون تَوَالِيفه وَنَقْلَه لِلفنِّ بِالقَبُولِ

“He [al-Khatib] intended to criticize the structuring of the chain of narration and the claim of direct meeting. As for the accusation of fabricating letters or texts, far be it from him—I would never accuse him of that. He was an ocean of knowledge in the science of Quranic recitations, and the scholars of recitation accepted his works and transmission of the art with full acceptance.”[7]

Here, according to the Ash’aris’ own principles, they would be required to affirm the beliefs of Abu Ali al-Ahwazi since he was among those through whom Allah preserved the Quranic recitations and upon whom later scholars heavily relied.[8]

Another work relied upon by Ibn al-Jazari is the book “al-Rawdah” on Quranic recitations by Abu Umar al-Talamanki, who was the first to introduce the science of Qira’at in Andalusia. Abu Umar al-Talamanki was among the eminent scholars who opposed Ash’arism. Al-Dhahabi, in his biography, noted:

كان سيفًا مجردًا على أهل الأهواء والبدع، قامعًا لهم، غيورًا على الشريعة، شديدًا في ذات الله، أقرأ الناس محتسبًا، وأسمع الحديث

“He was an unsheathed sword against the people of desires and innovations, subduing them, zealous for the Shariah, and severe in matters concerning Allah. He taught people without seeking payment and transmitted Hadith.”[9]

In his book “al-Usul,” Abu Umar al-Talamanki states:

أجمع المسلمون من أهل السنة على أن الله استوى على عرشه بذاته، وأن الاستواء على الحقيقة لا على المجاز…

“The Muslims from among Ahl al-Sunnah unanimously agreed that Allah made istiwa over His Throne in His essence (bi-dhatihi) and that this istiwa is to be understood in its literal sense, not metaphorically…”

He then narrated with an isnad from Malik, who said:

الله في السماء وعلمه في كل مكان

“Allah is above the heavens, and His knowledge is in every place.”

He then mentioned in this book:

وأجمع المسلمون من أهل السنة على أن معنى قوله تعالى: {هُوَ مَعَكُمْ أَيْنَمَا كُنْتُمْ} ونحو ذلك من القرآن بأن ذلك علمه، وأن الله فوق السماوات بذاته مستو على عرشه كيف شاء

“The Muslims from among Ahl al-Sunnah unanimously agreed that the meaning of Allah’s statement, {He is with you wherever you are} and similar verses from the Quran, refers to His knowledge and that Allah is above the heavens in His essence (bi-dhatihi), established on His Throne as He wills.”[10]

Additionally, Ibn al-Jazari relied on the works of Imam Abu’ Amr al-Dani, who is among the most renowned scholars of Qira’at. Al-Dhahabi, in his biography, noted that al-Dani followed the Salafi methodology and quoted his poetic work on the Sunnah, which included the Hadith of Allah’s descent and other attributes. The poem states:[11]

كلا الفريقين من الجهمية ** الواقفون فيه واللفظية

أهون بقول جهمٍ الخسيسِ ** وواصل وبشر المريسي

“Both groups of the Jahmiyyah**the waqifah (those who suspend judgment on the Quran) and the lafziyyah (those who say the words of the Quran are created)

Are lesser in their views than the vile beliefs of** Jahm, Wasil, and Bishr al-Marrisi.”

It is well known that the Ash’aris belong to the lafziyyah, as they assert that the words are created, while the meaning that resides within the self is not. This is something the Ash’aris themselves acknowledge.

In summary, many of the books relied upon by Ibn al-Jazari, may Allah have mercy on him, were authored by scholars who were not Ash’aris.

The Status of Prominent Ash’ari Scholars in Islamic Sciences

The leading scholars of the Ash’ari school, who were the main architects of the madhab, were not known for their contributions to the preservation or transmission of religious sciences such as Hadith, Tafsir, or Quranic studies, contrary to what some contemporary voices may claim. Instead, their focus was predominantly on philosophical and kalami inquiries. Al-Ghazali, may God have mercy on him, famously described himself by saying:

أنا مزجى البضاعة في الحديث

"I am poorly equipped in the field of Hadith."[12]

As for Al-Juwayni, Al-Sam'ani remarked about him:

وكان قليل الرواية للحديث معرضًا عنه

“He had little interest in Hadith and avoided it.”[13]

Similarly, Yaqut al-Hamawi noted:

وكان قليل الرواية معرضا عن الحديث

"He had little engagement with Hadith and turned away from it."[14]

 Al-Dhahabi also commented on him, stating:

كان هذا الإمام مع فرط ذكائه وإمامته في الفروع وأصول المذهب وقوة مناظرته لا يدري الحديث كما يليق به، لا متنا ولا إسنادا

“Despite his exceptional intelligence, leadership in both the branches and principles of the madhab, and prowess in debate, this Imam did not have the requisite knowledge of Hadith, neither in its content nor its chains of transmission.”[15]

Regarding Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, he had no Hadith narrations at all. When Taj al-Din al-Subki criticized Al-Dhahabi for listing Al-Razi among the weak narrators, he defended Al-Razi by noting that he had no narrations to begin with. Therefore, there was no basis for placing him among the weak narrators. Al-Subki said:

وقد اعترف الفخر بأنه لا رواية له؛ فلا معنى لإدخاله في الضعفاء

“Fakhr al-Din himself admitted that he had no narrations; thus, there is no justification for including him among the weak narrators.”[16]

Ibn Hajar, in his biography of Al-Sayf al-Amidi, writes:

وتفنن في علم النظر، ثم دخل مصر وتصدر بها لإقراء العقليات، وأعاد بمدرسة الشافعي، ثم قاموا عليه ونسبوه للتعطيل، وكتبوا عليه محضرًا، فخرج منها واستوطن حماه، وصنف التصانيف، ثم تحول إلى دمشق ودرس بالعزيزية، ثم عزل منها، ومات في صفر سنة إحدى وثلاثين وست مائة وله ثمانون سنة

“He mastered the science of dialectics, then moved to Egypt, where he taught rational sciences and taught at the Shafi’i school. However, opposition arose against him, and he was accused of heresy. A formal complaint was filed against him, leading to his departure from Egypt. He then settled in Hama, where he authored several works, before moving to Damascus, where he taught at the Aziziyyah school. He was eventually dismissed from his position and passed away in the month of Safar in the year 631 AH at the age of eighty.”[17]

The intention behind showing all this is to clarify that the contemporary proponents refer primarily to the madhab associated with Al-Juwayni, Al-Razi, Al-Amidi, and others who had no role in transmitting religious knowledge. They then attempted to legitimize their position by aligning themselves with scholars like Al-Nawawi and Ibn Hajar, who were independent in their scholarship. This strategy is used to market their views to the general public. When students seek to study the Ash’ari school, they are presented with the works of Al-Juwayni, Al-Razi, Al-Amidi, Al-Sanusi, and others, constituting a misleading tactic that those deceived by this misconception fail to recognize.

The Reality of Ijazah Among Later Scholars

In the later generations, the ijazah became an honorary gesture, primarily intended for blessings rather than a rigorous means of transmitting Islamic knowledge. The sciences of Islam have been meticulously recorded and preserved, passed down from generation to generation. Scribes transcribed these works, and specialists have ensured their accuracy, as documented in the books.

Sheikh Al-Bashir Al-Ibrahimi recounts:

زرتُ يوما الشيخ أحمد البرزنجي رحمه الله في داره بالمدينة المنورة وهو ضرير، وقد نمي إليه شيء من حفظي ولزومي دور الكتب، فقال لي بعد خوض في الحديث: أجزتك بكلِّ مروياتي من مقروء ومسموع بشرطه… إلخ، فألقي في روعي ما جرى على لساني، وقلت له: إنك لم تعطني علمًا بهذه الجُمَل، وأَحر أن لا يكون لي ولك أجر؛ لأنك لم تتعب في التلقين، وأنا لم أتعب في التلقّي، فتبسَّم ضاحكًا من قولي ولم ينكر… -إلى أن قال:- إن ثمرة الرواية كانت في تصحيح الأصول وضبط المتون وتصحيح الأسماء، فلما ضبطت الأصول وأمن التصحيف في الأسماء خفَّ وزن الرواية وسقطت قيمتها. وقلت له: إن قيمة الحفظ -بعد ذلك الضبط- نزلت قريبا من قيمة الرواية، وقد كانت صنعة الحافظ شاقّة يوم كان الاختلاف في المتون، فكيف بها بعد أن تشعَّب الخلاف في ألفاظ البخاري في السند الواحد بين أبي ذر الهروي والأصيلي وكريمة والمستملي والكشميهن وتلك الطائفة

“One day, I visited Sheikh Ahmad Al-Barzanji, may Allah have mercy on him, at his home in Medina. He was blind and had heard of my memorization and frequent library visits. After a discussion, he said, ‘I grant you ijazah for all that I have narrated, both read and heard, with its proper conditions...’ etc. I spontaneously responded, ‘You have not imparted any knowledge to me with these words, and it is doubtful that either of us will be rewarded, for you have not exerted effort in teaching, and I have not exerted effort in learning.’ He smiled at my words without objection...He went on to say that the value of narration was in verifying the sources, preserving the texts, and ensuring the accuracy of names. Once the sources were verified and the risk of textual corruption was mitigated, the weight of narration diminished, and its value declined. I told him that the value of memorization—after such verification—had also decreased, much like the value of narration. The task of a hafiz was demanding when there were variations in the texts. But how much more so after the differences in the wording of Bukhari’s chains of transmission had multiplied, even among Abu Dharr Al-Harawi, Al-Asili, Karima, Al-Mustamli, and Al-Kushmihanni, and that group...”[18]

The Misconception of the Discontinuity of Salafi Chains of Transmission in Later Eras

One of the misconceptions propagated by opponents is the claim that Salafis have a broken chain of transmission concerning the sciences of Islam. They assert that Salafis have no isnad connected to the books of Hadith, Fiqh, or even to the works of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. They often pose the question: How can you advocate for the works of Ibn Taymiyyah when you have no chain of transmission to him?

It is perplexing that such opponents exhibit such confidence when presenting this argument despite not having taken the time to research the matter. They seem to conjure up an idea in their minds, believe it to be true, and then treat it as an unquestionable fact without subjecting it to further investigation or discussion!

We respond by stating that this claim is simply incorrect. The books documenting contemporary scholars’ isnads are too numerous to count. Some of these works have been published, while others are recorded in the scholarly thabat (isnad collection). However, as we have noted before, opponents often rely on the ignorance of their audience when presenting such misconceptions.

Sheikh Dr. Ahmad Ma’bad Abdul Karim, the leading hadith scholar at Al-Azhar, requested ijazah in hadith from the esteemed Sheikh Abdul Aziz Ibn Baz. In the program “My Memories,” while discussing his meeting with Sheikh Ibn Baz, he mentioned, “I requested ijazah in hadith from His Eminence at that time.”[19]

If Sheikh Ibn Baz had not had a chain of transmission in hadith, it would not have been appropriate for Sheikh Ahmad Ma’bad to make such a request. This claim is merely a baseless rumor, entirely unfounded. The chains of transmission of the scholars from Najd are well-preserved in books and collections. One such work is “Al-Ijazah al-Ilmiyyah fi Najd: Qira’ah Istiqra’iyyah” (The Scholarly Certification in Najd: An Analytical Reading) by Dr. Hisham Al-Sa’id, spanning seven volumes. This scholarly study focuses on the chains of transmission of the scholars from Najd, starting from the era of Sheikh Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahhab, his descendants, and his students. All of these chains are connected to the books of hadith, including the Sahih, Sunan, Musnad collections, compilations, and commentaries, as well as the books of Hanbali fiqh, usul al-fiqh, works of aqeedah, and the writings of Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah. It is a comprehensive encyclopedia filled with the chains of transmission of the scholars from Najd.

Where is the sense of shame in the one who makes such claims, knowing full well that some of the most prominent figures in ijazah and the key transmitters of hadith in modern times include Sheikh Al-Musnid Abdul Haqq Al-Hashimi, may Allah have mercy on him, and his son, Sheikh Abdul Wakil ibn Abdul Haqq Al-Hashimi? Both Salafis and Ash’aris alike narrate hadith from them.

Sheikh Abdul Haqq Al-Hashimi’s major work, “Al-Thabat al-Kabir,” has been published alongside the treatise “’Itiqad al-Firqa Al-Najiyah,” which was endorsed by Sheikh Abdul Aziz Ibn Baz, may Allah have mercy on them both.

Additionally, other renowned hadith transmitters of our time include the esteemed Sheikh Hammād Al-Ansari, Sheikh Abdullah ibn Aqil Al-Hanbali, Sheikh Muhammad Al-Amin Al-Shanqiti, Muhammad Al-Amin Bu Khubzah Al-Titwani, Muhammad ibn Ismail Al-Omrani Al-Yemeni, and many others.[20]

No contemporary Salafi scholar lacks a thabat through listening and ijazah in the books of hadith, Quranic recitations, tafsir, and other sciences. Some scholars have even compiled their thabat into a volume.

The Misconception that Ibn Taymiyyah’s Chains of Transmission are Invalid Because He Differed from His Teachers

One final objection raised by opponents is the claim that the chains of transmission from Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah to Imam Ahmad are not reliable, arguing that Ibn Taymiyyah deviated from his predecessors on certain doctrinal issues, thus rendering his chains of transmission worthless. This argument has been put forward by some who identify as contemporary Hanbalis.

Had the critic taken the time to think carefully, he would not have filled pages with this logical fallacy. Disagreeing with predecessors on certain scholarly issues—even if we assume it occurred—does not invalidate the books transmitted through those chains or the knowledge derived from them. These are two separate matters. Scholars have always differed from one another on various issues, yet this has never been considered a reason to disregard the continuity of their chains of transmission.

In aqeedah, Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la differed from his teacher, Al-Hasan ibn Hamid, on some of the most specific issues regarding the names and attributes of Allah. Despite this, he remained one of the most esteemed of his teachers, from whom he transmitted an isnad back to Imam Ahmad. Al-Qadi Abu Ya’la did not invalidate his teacher’s chain of transmission.

In Ilm al-Kalam, Al-Fakhr al-Din al-Razi made kalami selections and investigations that differed from those of the earlier Mutakallimun, often critiquing and discussing their views. This did not invalidate the chain of transmission.

In fiqh, Imam al-Nawawi made scholarly contributions specific to the Shafi’i school that differed from his Shafi’i teachers. Nevertheless, he did not disregard their chains of transmission.

In usul al-fiqh, Imam al-Qarafi introduced original arguments and reasoning that enriched the discipline, yet this did not disrupt the continuity of the chain of transmission.

This is because isnad is simply the transmission of a report back to its original source. However, one scholar's understanding of issues and exercise of ijtihad may differ, for someone who carries knowledge may pass it on to someone more knowledgeable than themselves.

This concludes the responses to the misconceptions of some contemporary individuals. If they had engaged in deeper thought, adopted a fair approach, committed themselves to research, and refrained from arguing out of desire, they would not have fallen into most of these fallacies, which do not belong to serious academic inquiry.

May Allah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, and his companions.

---

[1] Translator’s note: See: Does It Matter If the Majority of Scholars Follow Your Theological School?

[2] Refer to: “Siyar A'lam al-Nubala'“ (18/513)

[3] Refer to: “Tabaqat al-Huffaz” (1/522)

[4] “Nuzhat al-Nazar” (p 73)

[5] “Al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashr” (1/34)

[6] “Al-Nashr fi al-Qira’at al-‘Ashr” (1/67-68)

[7] “Siyar A'lam al-Nubala'“ (18/13)

[8] Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah attributed al-Ahwazi to the Salimiyah, who are among the Ahl al-Hadith, and they agree with Ahl al-Hadith except in minor issues. Our previous discussion was in the context of arguing with the Ash'aris. Shaykh al-Islam said in “Majmu‘ al-Fatawa” (5/556):

كان أبو الحسن الأشعري لما رجع عن الاعتزال سلك طريقة أبي محمد بن كلاب، فصار طائفة ينتسبون إلى السنة والحديث من السالمية وغيرهم كأبي علي الأهوازي يذكرون في مثالب أبي الحسن أشياء هي من افتراء المعتزلة وغيرهم

“When Abu al-Hasan al-Ash‘ari renounced Mu‘tazilism, he followed the path of Abu Muhammad ibn Kullab. Thus, a group of people who claim to follow the Sunnah and Hadith, such as the Salimiyah and others like Abu ‘Ali al-Ahwazi, mentioned certain flaws of Abu al-Hasan, which are actually fabrications by the Mu‘tazilah and others.”

Also see: “Majmu‘ al-Fatawa” (5/484), and “Tarikh al-Islam” by al-Dhahabi (30/126)

[9] “Siyar A'lam al-Nubala'“ (17/567)

[10] Refer to: “Majmu‘ al-Fatawa” (3/219), and “Ijtima‘ al-Juyush al-Islamiyyah” (p 76)

[11] Refer to: “Siyar A'lam al-Nubala'“ (17/77)

[12] Refer to: “Al-Bidaya wa’l-Nihaya” (12/214)

[13] “Al-Ansab” (3/386)

[14] “Mu‘jam al-Buldan” (2/193)

[15] “Siyar A'lam al-Nubala'“ (18/471)

[16] Refer to: “Lisan al-Mizan” (4/226)

[17] “Lisan al-Mizan” (4/227)

[18] “Athar al-Bashir al-Ibrahimi” (3/545)

[19] From the program “Dhikrayati” (“My Memories”) With Shaykh Ahmad Ma’bad Abd al-Karim, Part Two (minute: 47) Link to the episode: 

[https://wwwyoutubecom/watch?v=psgtK3kNZaY](https://wwwyoutubecom/watch?v=psgtK3kNZaY)

[20] Refer to examples of Salafi chains of narration in the book “Kawkabat Min A’immat al-Huda wa-Masabih al-Duja” by al-Qaryuti (pp 144-147)