A number of common objections are raised against the Hanafī madh'hab in particular, thus it was considered appropriate to briefy discuss these objections and provide answers to them.
First Objection Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله), among other imāms, has been quoted as having said, "If there is a sound hadīth that goes against my opinion, then throw my opinion to the wall." In light of this statement, some people insist that whenever an opinion of the Hanafī school apparently contradicts any authentic hadīth, it is necessary to reject the opinion of Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) and follow the hadith.
Answer
Firstly, it is not within the capability of a non-scholar to determine whether in reality Imām Abū Hanīfa's (رحمه الله) view contradicts a sound hadīth or not. What may apparently seem as Imām Abū Hanīfa's (رحمه الله) having neglected a hadīth, as some ofen presume, is ei-ther due to considering the hadīth abrogated by a Qur'ānic verse or another hadīth, or that it is to be acted upon in a limited way. It is obvious that Imām Abū Hanīfa's (رحمه الله) reaching this conclu-sion will be afer a comprehensive and in-depth study of all the texts. An example of this is the hadīth of rafʿ al-yadayn (raising the hands in prayer) in Sahīh al-Bukhārī and Sahīh muslim. Here it is argued that Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) lef the hadīth, and some argue that these hadīths did not reach him. However, the truth is that he knew of these hadīths and debated Imām Awzāʿī (رحمه الله) in makka concerning them, as recorded in his musnad with its commentary by Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī (رحمه الله) (pg.35-38).
Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) however took into consideration the many other sound hadīths which explicitly state that Allāh's Messenger (صلي الله عليه وسلم) only raised his hands at the beginning of salāh and that this was also the practice of many Companions afer the death of Allāh's Messenger (صلي الله عليه وسلم). He narrates the sound hadīth through his own chain of narration from Ibn Masʿūd (رضي الله عنه) that Allāh's Messenger (صلي الله عليه وسلم) would not raise his hands except at the beginning of salāh. This led Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) to seek a middle position, i.e. that the practice was once part of salāh, but like many other components of tahāra and salāh, was later abrogated as the mode of salāh became fnalised. Thus, he did not ignore the hadīths, but rather reconciled between them.
In conclusion, the Imām's statement was not addressing the layman, but rather fellow scholars or his eminent students, who were expert scholars in their own right and who could appreciate the sophistication of the issues involved. This being the case, it would be unjust and foolhardy for a layman to read a hadīth and then demand that the followers of Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) also adopt its practice in the way and manner he does. This applies equally to the other three schools of thought, as each has its evidences and proofs which the layman cannot fully grasp.
(Understanding Taqleed: Following One Of The Four Great Imams, Mufti Muhammad Sajjad)
In conclusion, the Imām's statement was not addressing the layman, but rather fellow scholars or his eminent students, who were expert scholars in their own right and who could appreciate the sophistication of the issues involved. This being the case, it would be unjust and foolhardy for a layman to read a hadīth and then demand that the followers of Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) also adopt its practice in the way and manner he does. This applies equally to the other three schools of thought, as each has its evidences and proofs which the layman cannot fully grasp. [/color]
(Understanding Taqleed: Following One Of The Four Great Imams, Mufti Muhammad Sajjad)
this is the best part, i love it! i think i'll have to communicate this ouT
A second simplistic objection, in reality strongly related to the aforementioned objection, is that the Hanafīs even when presented with authentic hadīths which confict with their madh'hab give precedence to the opinion of Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله). Thus, surely those who accept the hadīths are observing the correct methodology, as opposed to those who follow Imām Abū Hanīfa's (رحمه الله) opinions.
Answer
Again, this is another crude over-simplifcation of the issue. The simple answer to this is that there is no standard criteria to determine which hadīths take precedence over others, rather each of the erudite imāms formulated his own set of principles whereby he reconciled between conficting hadīths. Thus, a hadīth which is cited as evidence by one imām may not be accepted by another imām, due to the presence of other evidences which outweigh it according to the latter's principles. Based upon this, the very same objection can be reversed against those who raised this objection in the frst place. i.e. you do not accept the hadīths we base our madh'hab upon. Further-more, it is much safer to accept the rigorously systemised principles of an expert mujtahid imām with extensive knowledge of the Qur'ān and Sunna as opposed to the opinions of a person whose knowledge of the Dīn does not extend beyond the scope of a summarised version of Sahīh al-Bukhārī and at that, a translation of it.
Shaykh Ashraf ʿAlī Tānawī (رحمه الله) has eloquently made this very point in his Ashraf al-Jawāb, p.211: "Where a diference is found on a certain ruling, it is because there are (several) opposing hadīths. The hadīth you mention to us, we do not act upon, but we act upon another hadīth that we accept but which you do not act upon. Why do you accuse us then? you can also be accused of doing the same. you will argue that your hadīth is more preferable and ours is ineligible (marjūh). Our response is that the method of deciding what is preferable is dependant upon percep-tion and comprehension. According to your perception, a particular hadīth is preferable whereas according to the perception of Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله), a diferent hadīth is more preferable to be acted upon. According to us, the perception of Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) in comparison to your perception is safer and better (as his depth of knowledge of Allāh's Book and the hadīths of the Messenger (صلي الله عليه وسلم), his expertise in grasping their subtleties, his trustworthiness, his penetrating insight, honesty, and fear of Allāh (سبحانه وتعالى) were testifed to by thousands of imāms and scholars of the umma). In light of this, to declare yourselves as those who act upon hadīths and those who follow the four imāms as not acting upon hadīths is pure bias."
(Understanding Taqlid: Following One Of The Four Great Imams, Mufti Muhammad Sajjad)
A common objection which is nothing short of gross ignorance is that Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) was not a muhaddith (hadith expert), and hence many hadīths did not reach him. Therefore, it is unwise to follow an imām whose knowledge of the Sunna of Allāh's Messenger (صلي الله عليه وسلم) was deficient.
Answer It is totally incorrect to claim that Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) was not a muhaddith or that he lacked knowledge of hadīth. It is established through many sources that Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) spent many years travelling across the muslim world to acquire hadīths, until he became a hadīth master (hāfiz al-hadīth). He remained a student in the circle of the muhaddith ʿAtā ibn Abī Rabāh (رحمه الله) in makka for several years, with ʿAtā (رحمه الله) recognising him from amongst his distinguished students. Similarly, he obtained narrations from muhaddiths all across the muslim world.
Kufa, the Imām's birthplace and where he spent most of his life, was a hub of learning and hadīth circles. Major Companions such as Ibn Masʿūd (رضي الله عنه) and ʿAlī (رضي الله عنه) had migrated to Kufa and transmitted their wealth of narrations to their students who held their circles throughout the city. ʿAllāma Zāhid al-Kawtharī (رحمه الله), in his Fiqh Ahl al-ʿIraq - printed as an introduction to ʿAllāma Zaylaʿī's (رحمه الله) Nasb al-Rāya, vol.1, pg.16-18 - has recorded a number of their students who taught hadīths in Kufa, making the city a focal point for hadith students from around the muslim world. These narrators include: ʿUbayda Sulaymānī (رحمه الله)(d. 72 ah), ʿAmr bin maymūn (رحمه الله)(d. 74 ah), Zarr bin Hubaysh (رحمه الله)(d. 82 ah), Abū ʿAbd al-Rahmān al-Sulamī (رحمه الله)(d. 74 ah), Suwayd bin Ghafala (رحمه الله)(d. 82 ah), ʿAlqama ibn Qays (رحمه الله)(d. 82 ah), Masrūq (رحمه الله)(d. 63 ah) and others. Thus, the hadīths which were prevalent in makka, Madīna, Syria and ʿIraq were undoubtedly in the knowledge of the Imām. Consequently, the Imām's biographies testify to his abundance of narrations, his many teachers and students.
Another interesting fact is that Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) narrates many hadīths with chains that are termed thunā'iyyāt (narrations consisting of two narrators) and thulāthiyyāt (narrations consisting of three narrators). This means that between the Imām and Allāh's Messenger (صلي الله عليه وسلم), there only exists three narrators and ofen only two. In a book entitled Al-Imām al-Aʿzam Abū Hanīfa Wa '-l-Tunā'iyyāt fī Masānīdihī, by Shaykh ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Saʿdi (رحمه الله), it is stated that just the thunā'iyyāt (narrations consisting of two narrators) of the Imām are approximately two hundred and nineteen narrations. This makes his narrations, according to the standards of the classical hadīth scholars (muhaddithūn), stronger than the narrations found in the Sahīhs of Bukhārī and muslim, as one will find that the number of narrators between them and the Messenger (صلي الله عليه وسلم) are in most cases not less than four (in fact, the thulāthiyyāt of Imām Bukhārī (رحمه الله) only number twenty-one narrations). This proves beyond doubt that Imām Abū Hanīfa (رحمه الله) was not only a reputable muhaddith, moreover he was among the major authorities and experts of hadith!
This cannot be undone and I am sure it will be greatly appreciated.
We apologise but you have been denied access to report posts in this thread. This could be due to excessively reporting posts and not understanding our forum rules. For assistance or information, please use the forum help thread to request more information. Jazakallah
