The Sunnis believe after the departure of the Prophet from the mortal world, the relation with God has been severed and whatever has been attained through revelation is enough and we ourselves can issue decrees for various matters.

But the Shias maintain that although revelation has been finished humanity needs infallible leaders to elucidate and explicate various subjects to issue the proper decree for them. It was also discussed that a lot of hadith (narrations from the words and behavior of the Prophet of Islam) were lost whereas a huge number of hadith was fabricated by ill-wishers. It is a matter of great surprise that very few hadith have been narrated by the Prophet’s close companions such as Salman, Abuzar and Ammar; while people like Abu Huraira, who lived just two years with the Prophet, has narrated 5974 hadith from the Prophet!!! Fabrication of hadith was so rampant that recognition of hadith became a science among Shias and Sunnis and they called it Elm al-Rejal.  Stay tuned for more.
The Takfiri currents always try to attribute their behaviors to weak and inauthentic hadith. Most of the narrations they vociferously propagate are rejected as bogus even by many Sunni scholars. From the viewpoint of jurisprudence, Sunnis follow one of the four sects. If we want to put these sects in a historical order they will be as follows: The Hanafi sect was founded by Abu Hanifa who lived from 80-150 AH. The Maleki sect was founded by Malek bin Anas from 93-173 AH. The Sahfe’i sect was founded by Mohammad bin Idris Sahfe’i (150-204 AH); and the Hanbali sect was founded by Ahmad ibn Hanbal (164-241 AH).
What necessitates reviewing the personality and ideas of Ahmad bin Hanbal; is the claim of the Salafis and Wahhabis. Claiming to follow Ahmad ibn Hanbal, they try to provide roots and precedence for themselves in the Islamic world. But the Hanbalis have never recognized them. The Hanbali thinkers have written different books against the Wahhabi Salafism which is an offshoot of Ibn Taymiyyah’s Salafism. As it was mentioned earlier, the school of Ahmad ibn Hanbal was attractive for the Salafis due to its strict attachment to hadith and appearance of the narrations without rationality.
The Salafis stick to Ahmad ibn Hanbal since he believed that the principles of the Sunni school of thought mean to follow the companions of the Prophet (SAWA). Ahmad ibn Hanbal didn’t believe in rationality and reasoning. He tried to prove everything through what was mentioned in hadith. He maintained that philosophy and logic were haram and a forbidden act. He even prevented any association with the adherents of rationality and philosophy. However, a brief look at the ideological bases of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and those of the Salafis will make us familiar with major differences between them. The main opponents of the Salafis in every era were the Hanbalis themselves. In the era of Al-Hassan ibn Ali al-Barbahari the Hanbalis rose against him. In the 7th century AH, too, when Ibn Taymiyyah founded Salafism, he was vehemently opposed by the followers of his father who was a Hanbali Sheikh. In the 12th century AH, the first opponents of Mohammad ibn Abdul Wahhab were his father and brother as two followers of Hanbali thought.
In different periods of hisroty the Hanbalis were the main enemies of Salafism. The Salafi ideology not only ignited the fire of discord among Islamic sects it also caused internal rift in the Hanbali sect. At the time when a group of the adherents of Hadith used to insult Ali bin Abi Taleb, Ahmad ibn Hanbal strongly struggled against this current. On the contrary, the Salafis considered Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s narrations pertaining to Imam Ali’s status as fake and calumniated the Prophet and his progeny.
Ibn Taymiyyah and Mohammad ibn Abdul Wahhab had ideas which were unprecedented in the thoughts of Ahmad ibn Hanbal. Rejection of intercession, reducing the Prophet’s lofty degree and position, and denouncing the issue of getting blessings through the pure servants of God were among the cases which didn’t exist in Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s ideas but were later devised by Salafis. The Salafis claim to follow Ahmad ibn Hanbal, but he cannot be considered as the initiator of Salafism; although there are streaks of his ideas in Salafism. Salafism was officially founded in the 7th century AH in the era of Ibn Taymiyyah.
Taqī ad-Dīn Abu 'l-`Abbās Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah was born in 661 AH in Harran. Harran, a ruined city in Turkey, was one of the urbanized and cultural cities in the past. Ibn Taymiyyah, in his works, has several times called the city as the center of idolaters and philosophers. The church men used to call it Helenopolis meaning the city of the pagans and polytheists. Harran was conquered at the time of the second caliph by Ayaz ibn Ghanam. The people of Harran, under the influence of their rulers strongly tended toward the Umayyads so that, as a result of the Umayyad propaganda, they would never end Friday prayers without cursing Imam Ali (Peace upon him).
When Omar ibn Abdul Aziz’s order to ban insulting the Prophet’s Ahl al-Bayt reached Harran, the people of the city rejected the order, saying, “Prayers will not be accepted without cursing Abu Torab (Imam Ali [Peace upon him]).” The city of Harran was the place of thriving of Hanbali jurisprudence and the Ibn Taymiyyah family and his ancestors, as the great Hanbali figures, used to boast of the city. No doubt such an environment was effective in formation of Ibn Taymiyyah’s ideas. In 667 AH when he was just 6 years old, the people left the city out of fear of the Mongol invasion. Ibn Taymiyyah’s father, Shahab-uddin Abdul Halim was one of the religious leaders who left the city for Damascus with his family. Thenceforth, Damascus was the place of education and residence of Ibn Taymiyyah family. Afterwards he taught in the city.
RM/ME