who wrote in his book Jaami'al-bayaan, Imam Hummad had once said that
the scholars of Hijaaz have no knowledge. He also said that our
children know more than them. He also said that Imams Ataa ibn Rubaah,
Tawoos, and Mujaahid had no knowledge. Imam Zuhri said, whilst
commenting on the scholars of Makkah, he had never seen anyone break
the walls(i.e the rules) of Islam more than the scholars of Makkah.
Even though great Sahaba and Taabe'een were resident in Makkah.
We know that Shaabee and Ibraheem Nakhee were great scholars but they
used to attack each other. Shaabee said "Look at at Ibraheem Nakh' ee!
He asks me masaa'il by night and preaches to the people in the morning
as though it is his own research!" Ibraheem Nakhee said: "Look at
Shaabee! He is a liar, and narrates Hadith from Masrook, but he has
never met him!" Imam Dahaaq once boasted that he know more than the
companions. Imam Sayyid bin Jubair once said that Shaabee was a liar.
He also said about Imam Ikramah that he is the student of Abdullah bin
Abbas and he attributes false Ahadith to ibn Abbaas.
Imam Malik said about Muhammad bin Is-haaq that he is was one of the
dajjaal. Imam Malik also said about the scholars of Iraq that they
have become like the people of the book, so don't say that they are
speaking the truth or that they are lying. Imam Abdullah bin Mubarak
once said, "I don't consider Imam Malik to be a scholar" Imam Abu
Hanefah said about Imam 'Amash that he has never kept the fast of
Ramadhan nor taken the bath of major impurity. Imam Yahya bin Mu'een
has criticised the high-ranking scholars of Hadith. He has even said
that Imam Shafi' is weak in Hadith. This is the situation of the
scholars of Hadith but the strangest thing is that human weaknesses
even overcame the Sahabah. For this reason the Sahabah used to
critisize each other. An example is Abdullah bin Umar, who when was
told that the Witr Salaah was not compulsory by Abu Hurairah, said
that Abu Hurairah was a liar.
Hadrat A'isha (Radiall hu anha) once said the Anas bin Malik and Abu
Sa'eed Khudree do not know anything
About Hadith as they were children at the time of the Prophet [May
Allah bless him and grant Him peace]. Once Hasan bin Ali (Radiall hu
anhu) interpreted a verse of the Qur'an and someone said that ibn Umar
and Abdullah bin Zubair have given another interpretation. Hasan then
said that they are both liars. Hadrat Ali (Radiall hu anhu) once said
that Mugheerah bin Shubah is a liar. Ubaidah bin Thabit said that
Mas'ood bin Aws Ansaari is a liar, even though he fought in the battle
of Badr.
If one wants to investigate this matter further one can read the
history of jarh-ut-ta'deel. These books have critisised other
scholars. The reason for this is that they were human and had human
weaknesses and so sometimes they would call a weak scholar a good
scholar, and vice versa. It is necessary to refer to these books
carefully before making any presumptions about a particular scholar.
[Tafheemaat, chapter, maslak-e-it'daal, by Sayyed mawdoodi]
It is proved, from the above, that if a scholar claims something about
another scholar then we cannot say that his claim is always correct.
The only thing that we can conclude is that the claim is only the
scholar's personal view. If we say that the claim is always correct
then we would have to accept every scholar's word, which is
impossible. An example is that of Hadrat Abbas (Radiall hu anhu)
claiming that the Ali (Radiall hu anhu) was a liar, sinner, and
betrayer. We cannot accept that Hadrat Ali (Radiall hu anhu) was
actually that which Abbas (Radiall hu anhu) said. This is because we
know about the greatness of Hadrat Ali (Radiall hu anhu) who was
neither a liar nor betrayer. He was one of the ten who was given glad
tidings of Jannah (Paradise) in their lifetime and the fourth
Khaleefah of Islam. We know also that Imam Malik was a great scholar
so no-one can accept Abdullah bin Mubaarik's claim that Imam Maaik was
not a scholar. We also do not accept Imam Yahya bin Mu'een's claim
that Imam Shaafe'ee was weak in Hadith. In the same way, no-one can
accept the claims made against Imam Abu Hanefah by following what some
scholars say about him. In short, we have to see what the majority of
scholars have said about a particular scholar and then accept or
reject their opinions.
Now let us look into the second person who is often used to justify
attacks against Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh
2) Khatib al Baghdadi:
His correct name was Abu bakr Ahmed Bin Ali Al Khatib Al Baghdadi and
he passed away 463 Hijra. Khatib Baghdadi was a great scholar of
Hadith wrote many books on Usul-al-Hadith (principles of Hadith) but
his most popular book is Tareekh Baghdad, (written in 14 volumes). The
copy that I am using was issued in Al Maktaba Salfia Al Madina Al
Manawara. If we look at volume 13 under the life history of Nauman Bin
Sabit (name of Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh) there are two
chapters on Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh.
In the first chapter he writes how the other scholars have praised
Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh and in the second chapter he talks
about what the enemies of Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh said
about him. Khatib Baghdadi said that I personally recognized the
greatness of Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh and his knowledge. It
is my right that where I have mentioned his excellence I can also
bring forward the opinions of the people who were against him. The
enemies of Imam Abu Hanifahh do not mention those narrations, which
are in praise of Imam Abu Hanifahh. They only mention Khateeb's
narration, which are against him- and imply that al Khateeb too was
against the Imam.
Before we go further, at this point it can be concluded that whatever
has been said against Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh cannot be
accepted as the truth:
Our Shaykh Shah Abu Al Hassan Zaid Farooqi Naqsh Bandi said: "In 1931
I was in Egypt. In that period an article was published in the popular
newspaper Al Ahraam that Khateeb's Tareek has been published and will
be available soon. In his Tareekh there is one chapter against Imam
Abu Hanifah. Al Azhar decided that it was upon themselves to respond
to this chapter written by Khatib Baghdadi. This response was then
printed in the footnote of the book Tareekh Baghdad. Upon reading the
above book and its footnote it is clearly understood that the said
chapter is totally untrue.
Furthermore it is noted that whosoever reported Khateeb's accusations
against Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayy. We see that in the same
book he also says that these narrators are not trustworthy. Moreover
Muhadis Al Asar Alama Zahidul Al Kausri (Rahmatullah Alai) wrote a
book called Taneeb Al Khatib in which he clarifies that truly these
accusations are false and notes that all the evidences used were from
the same book Tareekh Baghdad.
Now let us see what Khateeb says about Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah
alayh in Tareekh Baghdad under the biography of Imam Abu Hanifah
Rahmatullah alayh. (a number of examples are taken)
1. Khateeb says Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh was from the Murj'iee
2. He says that Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh confirmed that Riba
(interest) is halal (Permissible)
3. In Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh Halqas (meetings) there was
no salutation
(Salaah/blessings) bestowed on the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and
grant Him peace].
3. Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayhs and his students were like
Christians. (As'tagfirullah) (Changing Qur'an and Sunnah like the
Christians).
4. Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayhs followers said that his
knowledge was greater than that of the Prophets [May Allah bless Him
and grant Him peace]. ('Astagfirullah')
5. Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh used to say that had the Prophet
[May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] been present at his time he
would have taken his opinion (that is He would have learnt many
things) from me. ('Astagfirullah')
6. When a Hadith would be presented he would reject and say scrap this
with the pig's tale.
[Tareekh Baghdad by Khateeb Al-Baghdadi under Nu'maan Bin Thabit]
We do not need to go any further as you will have already realised
that this is not acceptable by any Muslim. From the above accusations
let us clarify one thing that the other accusations are very similar.
Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh said that if Usman Bathi Al Basri
was present in my time he would have taken many of my opinions but the
above narrator Khateeb al-baghdadi removed Usmans name and replaced it
by the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace].
[Footnote, Tareekh Baghdad chapter Abu Hanifahh]
Khateeb took this information from Yusaf Bin Sabat, Abi Nassar, Azdi,
and Al Wass Wassy, In the same book, Khateeb also wrote about these
narrators, that:
One of them was who used to make fabricated Hadiths. One of them was
weak in the Hadith, the other was a person who did not even believe in
Hadiths. One of them was Qadari (Sect), one of them used to make up
fabricated stories.
To prove that Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh was a Kaffir. From
the writings of Khateeb, we are led to believe that Imam Abu Hanifah
Rahmatullah alayh was an atheist, Jew, innovator, etc., etc., we seek
shelter in Allah, from this!!!
Now we shall review the accusations that were made against Imam Abu
Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh who said that he was a Murji'i. Who were the
Murji'ee? And who called Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh one?
Allama Shahar Sattaani, wrote in his famous book Al Milal, that:
In the early days the Shi'ahs began to propogate stories against Abu
Bakr and Umar Radi Allaho unhooma. During a period where there were
differences amongst the Companions, the Shi'ahs also made strange
stories concerning their differences. It was also the time when the
Khawarij declared the majority of Muslims, as Kafir they believed that
whoever committed a major sin was a Kafir. At this time,the sahiah
sect became famous. They said that differences that the companions of
the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him peace] had should go
without anything said about them, we should remain silent, and the
matter will be dealt with Allah Sub Hana hu Wataala. They also
believed that those Muslims who commit a great sin (Kabiraa) are not
kafirs. Some of the Murji'e believed that Imaan (Faith) is embedded in
the heart, so that, if someone utters blasphemous remarks, or worships
statues, or has a belief like a Jew or Christian, or worships whatever
he likes, he still is beloved to Allah and a perfect Muslim. They thus
believed that if a Kafir was to perform a good act then he/she would
receive no benefit from it, similarly, if a Muslim was to indulge
himself in blasphemous he/she remarks, or commits any major sin, it
would have no effect on his/her Imaan. In this way, they left all good
actions out and they openly indulged themselves in bad actions.
Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh also said that those who commit a
major sin were not Kafirs. The enemies of Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah
alayh picked upon this point to argue that he was a Murji'e. Imam Abu
Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh openly conducted good acts and never said
not to do good actions. He also never encouraged people that worship
what you like. The Mutazillah called every one who did not agree with
them concerning their belief as Murji'e. The Khawarij, on the other
hand, argued that the one who claimed that to perform a major sin is
not to be a Kafir. In this way, the Khawarij and Mutazillah gave Imam
Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh the title of Murji'ee. These two sects
not only called Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh a Murji'e, but many
other great scholars of Islam, such as: Hassan Bin Muhammad, Sa'eed
Ibn Jubair, Talaq Bin Habib, Umar Bin Murar, Mahaarib Bin Wassaar,
Maqaatil Bin Sulimaan, Hamaad Bin Abi Sulaimaan, called a number of
the scholars as Murji'e.
[Al Milal, By Allama Shahar Sitaani, Madhab Al Islammiya and Hiyaat
Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh, By Allama Abu Zuhraar Misri]
If Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh was a Murji'ee, it would have
become apparent in all the Hanafi books that it is permissible to
worship the cross, idols or you can be a Christian, Jew etc. Why is it
then that in the Hanafi books it is clearly stated that to worship
idols, the cross etc., is Kufr? (See the books of Hanafi Fiqh)
Why is it also, that there is a special book, which explains what
punishments are expected for those who perform bad acts? If you take
any book concerning Hanafi Fiqh, you will see two chapters dedicated
to explaining what things can make you a Kafir. The other chapters
will deal with the punishments' that those people will receive who
indulge themselves. In acts of adultery, stealing and other evil acts.
This is a clear proof that those who claim that Imam Abu Hanifah
Rahmatullah alayh is a Murji'ee, is repeating those accusations made
by the Khawarij and the Mutazalah are wrong.
There is another accusation made by people that Imam Abu Hanifah
Rahmatullah alayh knew only seventeen Hadith. Let's examine what
little truth this bears but before we go further lets see the sources
from which Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah alayh extracted his
information.
Hafidhh Iban Al Qayyim states:
Allah Soob ha Na hu Wat'aala sent the Prophet [May Allah bless Him and
grant Him peace] to teach Islam. During that early period those that
learnt became known as companions which were over hundreds of
thousands, out of which one hundred and thirty (130) gave more Fatwas
than the rest. There were seven amongst the companions that gave the
highest number of Fatwas. Those seven were Umar Bin Khatab, Ali Bin
Abu Talib, Abdullah Bin Masaud, Umul Momineen Aisha, Zaid Bin Sabet,
Abdullah Bin Abbass, Abdullah Bin Umar Radi allahounhoom. Umar sent
Abdullah Bin Masaud to reside at Koofa. This was because Abdullah Bin
Masaud had great knowledge. Prophet [May Allah bless Him and grant Him
peace] said in a statement that he was great scholar.
Once two groups of people came from Syria and Koofa to visit Umar.
Umar gave gifts to both groups and the group from Koofa asked Umar
"why is it that we have received less than the Syrians." Umar replied:
'Did I not give you Abdullah Bin Masaud which is the greatest of all
gifts'. Abdullah Bin Masaud often said that I know about every Surah
in the
Qur'an and further who and what it was revealed for, if I know a
person that knows more than me I must go to him and learn from him.
Ibn Umar used to say Ibne Masaud is filled with knowledge. Imam Ibn
Jareer says that there is no other companion whose students wrote all
his Fatwas and his Fiqh, except Abdullah ibn Masuood. After a short
while hundreds of other companions also went to Koofa to reside there.
Later when Ali became Khaleefah he also moved to Koofa that is how
Koofa became the capital of the Islamic State. This then influenced
further companions to move to Koofa. Koofa became one of the center
points of knowledge of the Companiuns. At that time the most popular
school was of Ali and Abdullah Bin Masaud.
Later on some people started to attribute fabricated narrations linked
to Ali. Which is why the only acceptable narrations of Ali are those
which are through his generation and through students of Abdullah Bin
Masuad. Ali and Abdullah Bin Masaud had many popular students like
Umar Bin Sharjeel, Masrooq, Al Qamma, and others. And then Abraham and
Hammad Bin Suleiman became their students and Imam Abu Hanifah
Rahmatullah alayh became their student.
[Aalam Al Muwaqqaiy-een Chapter Qiyyas by Hafidhh Ibn Al Qayyim]
Imam Ibn Sa'ad says:
One large group of Companions started to reside in Kufa, There were
more than five hundred companions residing in Kufa. That is why Umar
Radi allaho unho said that Kufa is the center of the treasure. (Faith)
Kufa was the center at that time of knowledge.
[Tabaqat Ibn Sa'ad volume 6 chapter Kufa]
In the very same Kufa Imam Abu Hanifah Rahmatullah was born. In the
same place, he acquired his knowledge, he saw and learnt from the
Companions and learnt from the Tabe'een. To learn more knowledge he
often travelled to Makkah, Madina, Syria, Yemen and Basra. How can it
be said that he only knew seventeen Ahadith? It is like saying to a
Hafidhh of the Qur'an that he knows Surah Fat
No comments:
Post a Comment