Imam al-A‘zam Abu Hanifa (RA): The Role Model (part 34)
Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) and the Science of Hadith
5. Statements of the Scholars of Jarh wa Tadil Concerning Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)
All scholars of the early generations and the leading scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah unanimously acknowledge the excellence of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA), and the statements of hundreds of scholars concerning his character, piety, worship, jurisprudence, and other qualities have been transmitted. Here, however, we shall limit ourselves to the statements of a number of scholars of Jarh wa Tadil concerning his precision and reliability in the science of Hadith.
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (RA), who is unanimously regarded as a great authority in the sciences of Hadith as well as jurisprudence, said: “إنه من العلم والورع والزهد وإيثار الآخرة بمحل لا يدركه أحد.” Translation: Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) had reached such a high position in knowledge (a term which, in that period, referred to the Quran and Sunnah), piety, asceticism, and preferring the Hereafter over this world that no one could attain his level.
Imam Yahya ibn Main (RA), the great critic of Hadith, said: “الفقهاء أربعة: أبو حنيفة، وسفيان، ومالك، والأوزاعي.” Translation: “The jurists are four: Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Sufyan al-Thawri, Imam Malik, and Imam al-Awzai (may Allah have mercy on them all).”
Elsewhere, when he was asked about Imam Abu Hanifa (RA), he replied, “ثقة، ما سمعت أحداً ضعفه، هذا شعبة يكتب له أن يحدث ويأمره، وشعبة شعبة.” That is, “He is trustworthy in Hadith. I have never heard anyone declare Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) weak. When a figure such as Imam Shubah writes to him asking him to narrate Hadith and instructs him to do so, what greater indication of his status could there be?”
Imam Shubah (RA), who was given the title Amir al-Muminin in Hadith, himself said, “كان، والله! حسن الفهم، جيد الحفظ، حتى شنعوا عليه بما هو أعلم منهم.” That is, “By Allah (SWT), he possessed excellent understanding and strong memory. Yet they criticized him over matters concerning which he was more knowledgeable than they themselves were.” [1]
Objections Raised Against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) Concerning Hadith and Their Responses
The objections raised against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) concerning Hadith can be divided into two categories:
The first category consists of verbal objections, meaning criticisms expressed through terms of jarh (criticism of a narrator).
The second category consists of theoretical objections, meaning objections arising from consideration of external factors.
Verbal Objections
First Objection: Imam al-Nasai (RA) Said About Imam Abu Hanifa (RA): “He Is Not Strong in Hadith.”
Among the verbal criticisms, the first was made by Imam al-Nasai (RA), who wrote, “نعمان بن ثابت أبو حنيفة ليس بالقوي في الحديث” [2] That is, “Numan ibn Thabit, Abu Hanifa, is not strong in Hadith.”
Response
The response to this objection is that both jarh and tadil are of two types.
One type is individual (mufrad), meaning criticism or commendation issued by one person or a limited number of individuals. The other type is multiple or collective (mutadid or murakkab), meaning that a group of scholars issue such a judgment.
According to the established principle, an individual criticism does not outweigh a collective commendation.
The explanation is that among all the Imams and Hadith memorizers of the past, hardly anyone remained completely free from criticism by some individual or another—with the exception of whomever Allah wills. For example, Imam al-Dhuhli criticized major scholars such as Imam al-Awzai, Imam Ahmad, Imam al-Shafii, Yahya ibn Main, Imam al-Karabisi, and Imam al-Bukhari. In contrast, dozens of critics and authorities in Jarh wa Tadil gave detailed commendations of these Imams. If the criticism of one or two individuals were given precedence over the collective commendation of many scholars, no one would remain trustworthy, and ultimately the entire corpus of Hadith would be undermined.
When a conflict occurs between Jarh and Tadil and criticism is given precedence, according to the view of al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (RA), this is when the number of those making the criticism is large while the number of those giving commendation is small. According to Ibn al-Salah, who regarded this as the position of the majority of scholars, criticism is given precedence when it is mufassar, meaning that the reason and basis for the criticism are explicitly stated.
Since the number of scholars who commended Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) is several times greater than those who criticized him, and since his status as an Imam in Hadith and his inclusion among the Hadith memorizers have already been established, while the criticisms attributed to certain critics are not clearly explained, the statement of Imam al-Nasai (RA) that “Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) is not strong in Hadith” does not undermine his reliability or expertise in Hadith.
Second Objection: Al-Daraqutni (RA) Declared Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) Weak
The second verbal objection against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) is that Imam al-Daraqutni (RA), while narrating the Hadith “من كان خلف الإمام فقراءة الإمام له قراءة,” said: “لم يسنده عن موسى بن عائشة غير أبي حنيفة والحسين بن عمارة وهما ضعيفان”
That is: “No one narrated this Hadith from Musa ibn Aishah in an uninterrupted chain except Abu Hanifa and al-Husayn ibn Imarah, and both are weak.”
Response
Indeed, this statement is authentically attributed to al-Daraqutni (RA), but the response to it is the same as the response to the objection of Imam al-Nasai (RA): namely, that this is an individual and unexplained criticism, and therefore it cannot be regarded as authoritative against collective and detailed commendations.
Another important point is that Imam al-Daraqutni (RA), who was born approximately two hundred years after Imam Abu Hanifa (RA), declared him weak in Hadith, whereas the leading Hadith scholars and prominent critics of Jarh wa Tadil who were contemporaries of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) commended him, as mentioned earlier. Who would be more knowledgeable about the condition of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA): his contemporaries or someone who came two hundred years after him? [3]
Third Objection: Sufyan al-Thawri (RA) Rejoiced at the Death of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)
The third verbal objection is that Imam al-Bukhari (RA), in his book Al-Tarikh al-Saghir, narrated from Nuaim ibn Hammad that when the news of the death of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) reached Sufyan al-Thawri (RA), he said, “الحمد لله كان ينقض الإسلام عروة عروة، ما ولد في الإسلام أشأم منه.”
That is, “Praise be to Allah [that Abu Hanifa has died]. He was undoing Islam knot by knot, and no one more ill-omened than him was ever born in Islam.”
Response
The response to this objection is that the report in question is false and has no connection with reality. Although some scholars considered Nuaim ibn Hammad trustworthy, the statement of Hafiz Ibn Hajar (RA) is sufficient to establish the falsity of this report. He said, “كان يروى حكايات في ثلب أبي حنيفة كلها كذب.”
That is: “He used to narrate stories attacking Abu Hanifa, all of which were lies.”
Furthermore, Sufyan al-Thawri (RA), who himself is counted among the students of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) and followed his opinion in ninety percent of issues, is very unlikely to have uttered such a statement concerning the Imam. In reality, this report is a serious accusation against both great scholars, Imam Abu Hanifa and Sufyan al-Thawri (may Allah have mercy on them both).
The question now arises: How could distinguished Imams such as al-Nasai and al-Daraqutni (may Allah have mercy on them) have considered Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) weak in Hadith? Or how could a personality such as Imam al-Bukhari (RA), who had attained the rank of an Imam in the science of narrators, have relied upon the statement of Nuaim ibn Hammad and included it in his book?
The answer is that just as Allah (SWT) had granted Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) great virtues and an elevated status, there were also many who envied him. Wherever they went, they spread lies and accusations about Imam Abu Hanifa (RA). Anyone who had not personally met the Imam could be influenced by such statements and develop negative assumptions about him, as illustrated by the well-known accounts involving Imam al-Awzai and Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak (may Allah have mercy on them).
Since some later Hadith scholars had neither personally met Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) nor his well-known students and had not spent time in Iraq, particularly Kufa and Basra, they too were influenced by the accusations of those who envied him and unknowingly repeated statements about Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) that had no basis in reality.
This is why Imam al-Bukhari (RA) also did not question the statement of Nuaim ibn Hammad and recorded it without investigation. His famous teacher, with whom Imam al-Bukhari spent considerable time, was Imam al-Humaydi. Since many of the critics of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) were associated with the Zahiri school, and Imam al-Humaydi also had an inclination toward the Zahiri school, Imam al-Bukhari (RA) consequently developed a negative impression of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) from the outset.
