Imam al-A‘zam Abu Hanifa (RA): The Role Model (part 39)
Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) and the Merits of the Hanafi Madhhab (Continued…)
Fifth: The Comprehensiveness and Superiority of the Hanafi Madhhab Due to Its “Hypothetical Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence)”
It is self-evident that not every issue, detail, and newly arising event (nawāzil) in the world is explicitly mentioned in the Noble Qur’an and the Prophetic Hadiths. Rather, the esteemed jurists derive rulings on events and newly emerging issues from the Book of Allah, the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), and the statements of the noble Companions.
The Hanafi madhhab is distinguished by its comprehensiveness and superiority over other madhhabs because it incorporates hypothetical jurisprudence (fiqh taqdīrī), a feature that other madhhabs do not possess to the same extent. Hypothetical jurisprudence means explaining the ruling on an issue or event before it occurs so that when it actually takes place, its answer is already available in the books.
Hypothetical jurisprudence is one of the most prominent characteristics of the Hanafi madhhab. For this reason, answers to various issues can be found in advance in its jurisprudential books. The Hanafi jurists have shown compassion toward this Ummah and, through considerable scholarly effort and hardship, have prepared solutions to anticipated problems. This demonstrates the breadth and comprehensiveness of Hanafi fiqh.
Regarding the benefits of hypothetical jurisprudence, it is narrated that one day Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) posed a question to Imam Qatadah (RA):
Arabic text:
قال قتادة: والله الذي لا إله إلا هو، ما يسألني اليوم أحد عن الحلال والحرام إلا أجبته، فقام إليه أبو حنيفة فقال: يا أبا الخطاب! ما تقول في رجل غاب عن أهله أعواماً، فظنت امرأته أن زوجها مات، فتزوجت ثم رجع زوجها الأول، ما تقول في صداقها؟ فقال قتادة: ويحك أوقعت هذه المسألة؟ قال: لا، قال: فلم تسألني عما لم يقع؟ فقال أبو حنيفة: إنا نستعد للبلاء قبل نزوله، فإذا ما وقع عرفنا الدخول فيه والخروج منه.
Translation:
Qatadah said, “By Allah, besides Whom there is no deity, whoever asks me today about what is lawful and unlawful, I will answer him.” Abu Hanifa stood up and said, “O Abu al-Khattab! What is your opinion concerning a man who has been absent from his family for years so that his wife assumes he has died and marries another man, but then her first husband returns? What is your opinion regarding her bridal dower?” Qatadah said, “Woe to you! Has this case actually occurred?” He replied, “No.” Qatadah asked, “Then why do you ask me about something that has not happened?” Abu Hanifa replied, “We prepare ourselves for trials before they occur so that when they do occur, we know how to approach them and how to find a solution.”
Today, throughout the Muslim world, many muftis make extensive use of the hypothetical jurisprudential issues found in the Hanafi madhhab and benefit greatly from them. [1]
Sixth: Extensive Use of Analogy (Qiyas) and Juristic Preference (Istihsan)
Before the advent of Islam, the cities of Baghdad and Kufa were centers of various religions and non-Islamic madhhabs of thought. When Baghdad became part of the Islamic realm and religious teachings began to flourish there, Kufa and Basra became centers of knowledge and religious learning. Nevertheless, individuals holding deviant ideas continued to exist in Iraq under the guise of Islam, occasionally raising objections and doubts concerning Islamic beliefs and rulings. [2]
On the other hand, not all the Hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) and the legal opinions of the Companions that were available in the Hijaz had reached Iraq. Furthermore, during the time of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA), the fabrication of Hadiths and the false attribution of statements to the Prophet (PBUH) had become widespread in Iraq, and some people fabricated Hadiths of their own accord. Moreover, Iraq was a land of diverse civilizations and religions, and its jurists encountered newly emerging issues that the esteemed mujtahids and jurists in Makkah al-Mukarramah and Madinah al-Munawwarah did not encounter in the same way.
These factors combined to lead Imam Abu Hanifa (RA), known as the “Jurist of Iraq,” to broaden the scope of jurisprudence. This enabled him to provide answers to the questions of those who sought them and to establish lawful and religious solutions for people’s everyday transactions and difficulties.
For this reason, Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) made extensive use of qiyas (analogical reasoning) and istihsan (juristic preference) as principles of Islamic jurisprudence. Where necessary, he expanded the application of istihsan to a degree not found in other madhhabs to the same extent. Through this approach, Hanafi jurists were able to resolve people’s difficulties, which itself serves as evidence of the comprehensiveness and superiority of the Hanafi madhhab.
It is evident that extensive application of analogy and juristic preference is not a task for everyone. Rather, it can only be undertaken by jurists who possess exceptional intelligence and insight. In the Hanafi madhhab, a weak hadith takes precedence over analogy. However, when no Hadith—even a weak one—is available on a particular issue, resorting to analogy and juristic preference becomes a necessity for a mujtahid.
According to Imam Abu Hanifa (RA), the principles of Islamic jurisprudence rest upon seven foundations:
The Book of Allah (SWT).
The Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).
The statements of the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them).
The extensive use of analogy and juristic preference in the Hanafi madhhab aims to ensure that the interests and welfare of people are adequately considered and that the issues facing the Ummah remain without unanswered solutions. Furthermore, istihsan embodies ease and facilitation, and the wisdom of Islamic law is founded upon making matters easier—a characteristic that, according to the author, is less evident in other madhhabs of thought.
Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) explained his principles for deriving jurisprudential rulings as follows:
“I first act according to the Book of Allah. If I do not find a solution to the issue in the Book of Allah, I turn to the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) and act upon authentic narrations transmitted by trustworthy narrators. If I do not find the answer in the Book of Allah or the Hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), I refer to his Companions. I accept the opinion of some of them and set aside that of others, but I never go beyond the range of their opinions. When it comes to the statements of Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, al-Sha‘bi, al-Hasan al-Basri, Ibn Sirin, and Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyib, they were mujtahids, and I exercise independent reasoning just as they exercised independent reasoning.”
Imam Muwaffaq al-Makki (RA) states: “The statement of Imam Abu Hanifa establishes the principle of accepting what comes from trustworthy sources, avoiding what is reprehensible, taking people’s transactions into consideration, and paying attention to the matters upon which people’s affairs depend and in which their welfare lies. Matters are initially addressed through analogy. When analogy proves ineffective, juristic preference is adopted so that the matter may be properly resolved. If matters cannot be rectified through juristic preference either, the mujtahid refers to the customary practices upon which people conduct their dealings—that is, custom.” [3]
Some people have portrayed the Hanafi madhhab as though it acts contrary to the Hadiths. However, Imam al-Dhahabi (RA) writes:
Arabic text:
روي نوح الجامع أنه سمع أبا حنيفة يقول: ما جاء عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فعلى الرأس والعين، وقال وكيع: سمعت أبا حنيفة يقول: البول في المسجد أحسن من بعض القياس، قال أبو محمد بن حزم: جميع الحنفية مجمعون على أن مذهب أبي حنيفة أن ضعيف الحديث أولى عنده من القياس والرأي.
Translation: Noah al-Jami‘ narrated that he heard Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) say, “Whatever comes from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), I accept with the utmost respect.” Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah (RA) also said, “I heard Imam Abu Hanifa say that urinating in the mosque is better than some forms of analogy.” Imam Ibn Hazm (RA) further stated, “All the Hanafis unanimously agree that Imam Abu Hanifa’s position was that a weak Hadith took precedence over analogy and personal opinion.”
