Objections Raised Against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) Concerning Hadith and Their Responses (Continued…)
Theoretical Objections
Three objections have been raised against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) in the category of theoretical objections.
First Objection: The Small Number of Hadiths Narrated by Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)
One of the objections raised against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) is that his contribution to the science of Hadith was very limited and that he had memorized only a small number of Hadiths. The argument is that if he had known a large number of Hadiths, he would certainly have narrated them.
Response
There are several responses to this argument. First, the assumption that “not narrating a Hadith necessarily means not possessing knowledge of it” is incorrect. A person’s mastery of Hadith does not require him to narrate everything he has memorized. Otherwise, this criticism would also apply to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both), who accompanied the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) during travel, at home, in jihad, and in calling people to Islam. They knew more hadiths than most others, yet relatively few narrations have been transmitted from them.
Even if we accept the claim that a small number of narrations indicates a small amount of memorized Hadith, this objection still does not apply appropriately to Imam Abu Hanifa (RA). Some individuals, such as Ibn Khallikan, have claimed that because Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) imposed extremely strict conditions for accepting a Hadith as authentic, only seventeen Hadiths were considered authentic by him. However, an objective examination makes it clear that a very large number of Hadiths have been narrated from Imam Abu Hanifa (RA).
In addition to collections such as the Musnad of al-Daraqutni, the Musnad of Ibn Shahin, the Musnad of al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, and the Musnad of Ibn Uqdah, Imam Muhammad ibn Mahmud al-Khwarizmi (RA) compiled a work entitled Jami Masanid al-Imam Abi Hanifa, in which he brought together fifteen Musnads containing narrations attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa (RA). According to Allamah al-Ayni (RA), the Musnad of Ibn Uqdah alone is so extensive that it contains nearly one thousand Hadiths.
Is it reasonable to criticize someone who has nearly twenty Musnad collections associated with his narrations by claiming that he knew only a few Hadiths? Absolutely not. Rather, according to one of Imam Abu Hanifa’s students, more than seventy thousand Hadiths were narrated from him.
Another point is that, if Imam Abu Hanifa’s (RA) contribution to Hadith were to be considered insignificant because of the relatively small number of narrations attributed to him, the same criticism would also apply to Imam al-Shafii and Imam Malek (may Allah have mercy on them both). Compared with the time they spent seeking Hadith, they too transmitted relatively few narrations. What kind of fairness is it to refrain from criticizing those two great Imams while making this accusation against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)? [1]
Why Did Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) Narrate Relatively Few Hadiths?
The reality is that, during the period known as Khayr al-Qurun (the best generation), Hadith scholars could be divided into two groups.
The first group consisted of scholars who specialized in Hadith but had not attained the level of independent jurisprudential reasoning (ijtihad). They therefore regarded their primary responsibility as narrating and transmitting Hadith.
The second group consisted of scholars whom Allah (SWT) had blessed not only with strong memories but also with the great gift of ijtihad. Since the ultimate objective of transmitting Hadith is to derive legal rulings from it, these great scholars devoted themselves to deriving legal rulings rather than merely transmitting the texts of Hadith. Consequently, the number of Hadiths narrated by them was not as large as that transmitted by scholars who specialized primarily in narration.
Since Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malek, and Imam al-Shafii (may Allah have mercy on them all) were all mujtahids, their focus on deriving jurisprudential rulings meant that they left behind a large body of legal opinions and rulings rather than an enormous number of Hadith narrations. (1)
Second Objection: The Two Sahih Imams Did Not Include Narrations from Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)
Another objection raised against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) is that the two Sahih Imams, Imam al-Bukhari and Imam Muslim, transmitted narrations from hundreds of Imams and Hadith scholars in their books, yet they did not transmit even a single Hadith through Imam Abu Hanifa (RA). It is claimed that this demonstrates that none of his hadiths were authentic.
Response
This objection is also unfounded. First, Imam al-Bukhari and Imam Muslim (may Allah have mercy on them both) did not include every authentic Hadith in their respective books. Many authentic Hadiths exist beyond those recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, and other Hadith scholars have transmitted them. The two Imams themselves acknowledged this fact.
Ibn al-Salah (RA) states, “لم يستوعبا الصحيح في صحيحيهما، ولا التزما ذلك.” That is, “They did not include all authentic Hadiths in their two Sahih collections, nor did they undertake to do so.” (1)
Second, just as the narrations of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) were not included in the two Sahih collections, the narrations of Imam al-Shafii (RA) are also absent from them. Even Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (RA), who transmitted more Hadiths than any other among the mujtahid Imams, has only two or three Hadiths transmitted from him in the entirety of Sahih al-Bukhari.
If the absence of a person’s narrations from the two Sahih collections were proof of weakness, the same argument would also have to be applied to Imam al-Shafii and Imam Muhammad (may Allah have mercy on them both). Why, then, is this objection directed only against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)?
The Method of the Two Sahih Imams in Transmitting Hadith
The reality is that the purpose of the two Imams in compiling their books was to collect Hadiths from those narrators whose traditions lacked prominent students and whose narrations might otherwise have been lost after their deaths. However, since Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam al-Shafii, and Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on them all) had hundreds of students, there was no fear that their narrations would disappear. For this reason, the two Sahih Imams did not include their Hadiths in their collections.
Makanat Abi Hanifa, p. 347.
Third Objection: Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) Gave Preference to Qiyas over Hadith
Another objection raised against Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) is that he gave preference to qiyas (analogical reasoning) over Hadith and would abandon a Hadith when it conflicted with qiyas.
Response
The claim that Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) gave priority to qiyas over Hadith is an accusation that has no connection with the truth. It has been authentically transmitted from Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) that he said, “كذب والله وافترى علينا من يقول: إننا نقدم القياس على النص وهل يحتاج إلى القياس بعد النص!؟” That is, “By Allah, the person who claims that we give precedence to analogical reasoning over the textual evidence is lying and fabricating a false accusation against us. Is there any need for analogical reasoning when textual evidence exists? Certainly not!”
Another well-known statement of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) is: “ما جاء عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فعلى الرأس والعين، بأبي وأمي، وليس لنا مخالفته، وما جاء عن الصحابة تخيرنا، وما جاء عن غيرهم فهم رجال ونحن رجال.” This means: “Whatever is authentically transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), may my father and mother be sacrificed for him, we accept wholeheartedly, and we have no right to oppose it. As for what is transmitted from the noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all), we exercise our judgment in choosing among their views. But when it comes to those who came after them, they were men who exercised independent reasoning, and we too are men who exercise independent reasoning.” [2]
The Reality of Giving Preference to Qiyas over Hadith
It is an evident fact that Imam Abu Hanifa (RA), despite the differences of opinion among the Imams, accepted even mursal Hadiths as legal evidence as a matter of caution and treated them as authoritative, like other Hadiths in general.
The extent of Imam Abu Hanifa’s (RA) commitment to Hadith can be understood from the statement of Imam Ibn al-Qayyim (RA), who says, “Whoever claims that Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) gave preference to analogical reasoning over Hadith has told an absolute lie. In many issues, other Imams did not act upon a Hadith because they considered it weak, whereas Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) acted upon that very Hadith and abandoned analogical reasoning, even though the Hadith scholars unanimously considered that Hadith weak.”
Here, we mention three examples.
First: Laughing Aloud During Prayer and the Position of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)
A hadith states: “من تقهقه في الصلوة فلينصرف وليتوضأ.”That is: “Whoever laughs aloud during prayer should leave the prayer, perform ablution, and pray again.”
In this matter, the implication of qiyas is that ablution should not be invalidated by laughing aloud, because no impurity has exited the body. The positions of the other Imams are also based on this analogy.
However, Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) acted upon this Hadith and held that laughing aloud during prayer invalidates both the ablution and the prayer, even though Hadith scholars unanimously considered this Hadith weak.
Second: The Requirement of a City for Friday Prayer and the Position of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)
Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) maintained that the existence of a city was one of the conditions for the obligation and validity of Friday prayer, and that Friday prayer was not valid in villages.
However, qiyas would suggest that Friday prayer should also be valid in villages, because people can gather in both places. Here, too, Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) set aside qiyas because of a weak Hadith and held that a city was necessary for the performance of Friday prayer.
Third: The Threshold for Cutting the Hand in Theft and the Position of Imam Abu Hanifa (RA)
Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) held that a thief’s hand should be cut off when the value of the stolen property reaches ten dirhams.
Here, the implication of qiyas is that a thief’s hand should be cut off regardless of whether the value of the stolen property is less than ten dirhams or more. However, a weak Hadith was narrated concerning the threshold of ten dirhams: “لا قطع أقل من عشرة دراهم” That is: “The hand is not to be cut off for theft involving less than ten dirhams.”
Therefore, in this matter as well, Imam Abu Hanifa (RA) abandoned qiyas and acted upon the Hadith.[3]
[2] Muqaddimat Tabyid al-Sahifah, by Professor Muhammad ibn Muhammad Abu Zahw, p. 54.
[3] Muqaddimat Tabyid al-Sahifah, by Professor Muhammad ibn Muhammad Abu Zahw, p. 54; Imamat al-Imam al-Azam fi al-Suluk wal-Aqidah wal-Hadith wal-Fiqh, by Muhammad Nur Suwayd, p. 340, publisher not stated.
1 Comment
Pingback: Imam al-A‘zam Abu Hanifa (RA): The Role Model (part 34)