Posts from: 2007-2017
Abu Hanifa (RA)
by GF Haddad ©
Among the works of the Imâm in kalâm:
The full chains of transmission for all these works are given in al-Muwaffaq's Manâqib and al-Kawtharî's Ta'nîb al-Khatîb as well as (in part) his introduction to al-Bayâdî's Ishârât al-Marâm (p. 6).
Al-Fiqh al-Absat. ("The Greatest Wisdom"), the same work as the Fiqh al-Akbar but in catechetic form narrated from the Imâm exclusively by Abu Mutî' al-Hakam ibn 'Abd Allâh ibn Muslim al-Balkhî al-Khurâsânî through Abu 'Abd Allâh al-Husayn ibn 'Alî al-Alma'î al-Kâshgharî (d. >484), both of them discarded as narrators.
In
this version the Imâm is related to state:
[1] "Whoever
says, 'I do not know whether my Lord is in the heaven or on earth'
commits disbelief (qad kafar), as does whoever says, 'He is on the
Throne and I do not know whether the Throne is in the heaven or on
earth.'" Imâm Ab al-Layth al-Samarqandî (d. 373) in his Sharh
al-Fiqh al-Akbar (misattributed to al-Mâturîdî) and his commentary
on the Fiqh al-Absat., and Imâm al-Bayâdî in Ishârât al-Marâm
all said: "He is a disbeliever because he attributes a place to
Allâh Most High." [Cf. Ghâwjî, Ab Hanîfa (p.
260).]
[2] "(The
Hand of Allâh is above their hands) (48:10), not like the hand of
creatures, and it is not a limb
(laysat bi-jâriha)."
[3] "If
someone says, 'Where is Allâh' The answer for him is that Allâh
existed when there was no 'where,' no creation, nothing! And He is
the Creator of everything!" This is confirmed as the true
position of the Imâm by al-Tahâwî's article in his "Exposition
of the Doctrine of Ahl al-Sunna wal-Jamâ'a" that "This is
the religion of the Muslims. Anyone that does not guard himself
against negation [of the Divine Attributes] or likening [Allâh to
something else], has gone astray and missed transcendence. For our
Lord - Glorified and Exalted! - is only described in terms of oneness
and absolute singularity. No creation is in any way whatsoever like
Him. He is beyond having limits placed on Him, or having boundaries,
or having parts, limbs, or organs! Nor is He contained by the six
directions as all created things are."
Certain
versions of the Fiqh al-Absat. have undergone identifiable
interpolations such as that narrated by the anthropomorphist
al-Harawî al-Ansârî in his book al-Fâruq fîl-Sifât as pointed
out by al-Kawtharî.[8]
The above documentation shows that
the pious Salaf did not wholly condemn involvement in kalâm as
a blameworthy activity but only, as Imâm Ab Zahra pointed out, its
specific use by the innovators - particularly their main sect, the
Mu'tazila - who diverged from the doctrines of Ahl al-Sunna.[9]
Those whom the Salaf meant in their condemnations of kalâm were the likes of Dâwud al-Jawâribî,[10]
Ibn Karrâm,[11] and other leaders of sects such as those described in heresiographies such al-Ash'arî's Maqâlât al-Islâmiyyîn, al-Baghdâdî's al-Farq bayn al-Firaq, Ibn Hazm's al-Fisal fîl-Milal, and al-Shahrastânî's al-Milal wal-Nihal.
Read more info/articles:
[ https://www.livingislam.org/ahanifa_e.html ]
--------------------
The vindication of the Imam
from the claim of
"Salafis" whereby Imam Abu Hanifa was da'if
(weak in Hadith)
Shaykh Hasan al-Saqqaf wrote in his book about Albani's attacks on the great scholars entitled
Qamus shata'im al-Albani
[Dictionary of Albani's Insults of the Scholars]:
"He [Albani] says of Imam Abu Hanifa:
"The imams have declared him weak for his poor memorization"
(in his commentary of Ibn Abi `Asim's Kitab as-Sunna 1:76)
although no such position is reported, see for example Ibn Hajar `Asqalani's biography of Imam Abu Hanifa in "Tahdhib al-tahdhib".
A blind follower of Albani replied:
The statement that no such position is reported is a lie, it was the position of Muslim (al-Kunaa wal Asmaa), Nasaa'ee (ad-Du'afaa) ibn Adee (al-Kaamil 2/403), ibn Sa'd (Tabaqaat 6/256), al-Uqailee (ad-Du'afaa p.432), ibn Abee Haatim (al-Jarh wat Tadil), Daaruqutnee (as-Sunan p132), al-Haakim (Ma'rifa Ulum al-Hadeeth), Abdul Haqq al-Ishbelee (al-Ahkaam al-Kubraa q.17/2), adh-Dhahabee (ad-Du'afaa q. 215/1-2), Bukharee (at-Taareekh al-Kabeer), ibn Hibbaan (al-Majrooheen)
Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani replies:
Our reliance is on Allah.
Shaykh Albani has shown enmity towards scholars, of a kind that passes all bounds and is unbefitting of a person with knowledge in Islam. As we mentioned in the first volume, Saqqaf has documented in his book an instance where Albani compares Hanafi fiqh to the Gospel in respect to distance from Qur'an and Sunna, and this would be unacceptable coming from a Christian, how then could it be accepted from a Muslim?
Albani and his following have pushed even the gentlest of scholars, the late `Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda, to take pen to paper to oppose such aberrations in his book Radd `ala abatil wa iftira'at Nasir al-Albani wa sahibihi sabiqan Zuhayr al-Shawish wa mu'azirihima (Refutation of the falsehood and fabrications of Nasir al-Din Albani and his former friend Zuhayr al-Shawish and their supporters). This book received two editions recently.
The claim by Albani's supporter whereby
"The statement that no such position is reported is a lie" is itself a lie. None of the references he adduces contains a single authentic proof for Albani's claim that "the imams have declared him weak for his poor memorization."
For such a claim to be remotely true it would have to be modified to read:
"He was graded weak by some scholars but this grading was rejected by the Imams."
The proof for this is that the positions reported against Imam Abu Hanifa in the references given are all weak and rejected, and often inauthentic in the first place, in the end amounting to nothing: therefore, even though there is criticism reported, it comes to nothing and does not constitute any "declaration of weakness by the Imams" as asserted by Albani!
The example given as proof by Saqqaf, namely Ibn Hajar `Asqalani's notice on Abu Hanifa in Tahdhib al-tahdhib, confirms that the Imams of hadith never declared Abu Hanifa weak, for Ibn Hajar would have had to report such a weakening if it held true.
Rather, he states the reverse, as seen from the translation of Ibn Hajar's notice excerpted below. This shows that Saqqaf's statement is correct, since Ibn Hajar undoubtedly represents the opinions of the Imams of hadith criticism and methodology concerning the weakness or poor memorization of any given narrator or scholar.
Moreover, Ibn Hajar in Taqrib al-tahdhib (1993 ed. 2:248 #7179) calls Abu Hanifah al-Imam, and al-faqih al-mashhur (the well-known jurisprudent), and Dhahabi includes him among the hadith masters in his Tadhkirat al-huffaz [Memorial of the Hadith Masters].
These titles are not given to anyone who is declared weak in hadith. And Dhahabi before Ibn Hajar, and al-Mizzi before Dhahabi, all concurred that no position purporting Imam Abu Hanifa's weakness should be retained, as Dhahabi said in Tadhhib al-tahdhib (4:101): "Our shaykh Abu al-Hajjaj [al-Mizzi] did well when he did not cite anything [in Tahdhib al-kamal] whereby he [Imam Abu Hanifa] should be deemed weak as a narrator."
The remainder of the "Salafi"'s references are therefore irrelevant and over-ruled, especially in view of Ibn `Abd al-Barr's statement that
"Those who narrated from Abu Hanifa, who declared him trustworthy (waththaquhu), and who praised him, outnumber those who criticized him" as related by Ibn Hajar al-Haytami in his book al-Khayrat al-hisan fi manaqib Abi Hanifa al-Nu`man (p. 74). Nevertheless we shall examine the sources that he brings up to show the extent to which these sources all suffer from various problems, as it is the wont of "Salafis" seen time and again to adduce false or weak evidence to promote their opinion.
more info/refutation:
[ https://neosalafism.wordpress.com/2007/06/25/albanis-weakening-of-imam-abu-hanifah-and-abu-raumaysah-blind-following/ ]
------------------------
---(Edited by ADHM)
