By Shaykh Gibril Haddad
Wa `alaykum as-Salam:
<<One common argument that I have heard against the Hanafi School is that Imam Abu Hanifah did not have a large amount of Hadith at his disposal. A brother gave me the example that he did not know the Hadith in other lands which became known later on. Another argument that I have heard is that he was jailed and this may have led to some flaws in his Madhab.
<<In his article “Understanding the Four Madhhabs the problem with anti-madhhabism” Shaykh Abdal-Hakim
Murad states:
<<“...the school of Imam Abu Hanifah, which was built on the foundations of the early legal schools of Kufa
and Basra, were wary of some hadiths in circulation in Iraq because of the prevalence of forgery engendered
by the strong sectarian influences there. Later, however, once the canonical collections of Bukhari, Muslim and others became available, subsequent generations of Hanafi scholars took the entire corpus of hadiths into account in formulating and revising their madhhab. This type of process continued for two centuries, until the Schools reached a condition of maturity in the fourth and fifth centuries of the Hijra.”
<<Can any of the knowledgable brothers offer some insight on this comment or know of a more detailed
description of the above mentioned events?
<<Does anyone know of books and/or articles in defence of the four schools and especially of the Hanafi school
since for some reason it seems to be the one that is most often targeted ?>>
Reply:
It is a myth that Imam Abu Hanifa did not have a large amount of Hadith at his disposal. Such a claim shows estrangement from his Fiqh, which reflects extensive knowledge of Hadith. The claim also shows ignorance of the fact that Abu Hanifa's Musnad exceeds in size the Musnad and Sunan of Imam al-Shafi`i, and no-one questions the latter's standing in Hadith.
As for the argument that Abu Hanifa - Allah be well-pleased with him - "was jailed and this may have led to some flaws in his Madhab," then all Four Schools are flawed on the same account as their Imams were all jailed at one time: an inept argument.
The Hanafi Madhhab "matured" very early. The fatwa today revolves around its first two generations, namely: the Imam, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, and Zufar, all but the third being classed as hadith Masters. Then came Imam Abu Ja`far al-Tahawi (229-321) whose monumental recensions of hadith [1] fully support the positions of the School, [2] precede or are exactly contemporaneous with the canonical Nine Books, and [3] leave nothing to be desired from the Nine Books but rather rival or - according to Imam al-Kawthari - supplant them in many respects. All this took place before the timeline cited by Sidi Murad.
For knowledgeable sources on the relation of the Hanafi Madhhab to Hadith and its sciences see the following:
- Hafiz al-Salihi's `Uqud al-Juman.
- Imam al-Kawthari's Fiqh Ahl al-`Iraq
- Al-Kawthari's al-Hawi fi Sirat al-Tahawi
- The introduction to al-Tahanawi's I`la' al-Sunan.
- Muhammad `Abd al-Rashid Nu`mani's Makanat al-Imam
Abi Hanifata fil-Hadith.
Allah knows best.
Was-Salam
Hajj Gibril
--
GF Haddad
Qasyoun@ziplip.com
See also my documentation of the refutation of the "Salafi" claim that Abu Hanifa was weak in hadith
(note: I had no say in the webpage title):
http://www.oocities.org/~abdulwahid/abuhanifah/imam_vs_munafiq.html
