What is your opinion of the statement that it is not permissible to weaken Imam Abu Hanifah, nor to accept the statements of those who criticized him, unless one goes through all his narrations and compares them with the narrations of the jurists?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Also, withThe Shaykh : Shu'ayb, there was a discussion between us regarding Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) (Glorified and Exalted is He). He presented his viewpoint and said: "It is not permissible to weaken Imam Abu Hanifah, nor to accept the statements of those who criticized him, unless one goes through all his narrations and compares them with the narrations of the jurists, as is the case. Otherwise, the weakening would have no meaning." Is this method acceptable?
The Shaykh : As for whether this method is acceptable, it is undoubtedly acceptable. But does he, for example, when he authenticates or weakens, follow this path?
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : So this is a matter of imposing an impossible task. When we say that so-and-so said that al-Bukhari classified him as a narrator of fabricated hadith, what is our position?
The questioner : We follow the Imam.
The Shaykh : We follow the Imam, but if we establish a disagreement with what the Imam said, we oppose him. This is the difference between the one who follows without understanding (mقلid) and the one who follows the evidence (muttabi'). As for this hypothesis brought by the person mentioned earlier, no scholar would say it. If he did say it, he would be the first to contradict it. Yes. And we have hundreds of narrators whom we weaken based solely on the statements of the Imams weakening them, even though for each one of them, only one or two of the Imams have weakened him. But as for Abu Hanifah, there are dozens of those who have weakened him, led by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. In reality, this is one of the effects of his sectarianism and fanaticism for the Hanafi school. He is now establishing a rule from himself, in which he contradicts the Imams of hadith and the Imams of the principles of jurisprudence. He says this statement, and no scholar would say it at all, even if he were drowning in blind following, if he were sane. Because the etiquette in speech, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said:Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 34:1367, . If this man said this to me, I would say to him: "Are you a mujtahid in the principles of hadith and the terminology of hadith, or a follower without understanding?" If he answered and did not act as a mujtahid, we would say to him: "Bring it, so we can see what your opinion is in the science of terminology in general. Are you a follower of it, or a contradictor and opponent of it?" If he said, "I am a follower of it except in some issues," we would say to him: "What is your basis in this issue?" And there, he would not be able to bring any kind of evidence for what he says, other than his fanaticism.
In summary: this is a matter of imposing an impossible task, to trace the hadiths of Imam Abu Hanifah. So we say to him now: Where are the hadiths of Abu Hanifah, so that we can rule in his favor or against him?
The questioner : He says in "Jami' al-Masanid," collected by...
The Shaykh : Okay, who is the one who collected the Masanid? Is he trustworthy, or is he accused? It means a vicious circle. He wants to take the hadiths from the book "Jami' al-Masanid," and the one who collected these Masanid is not trustworthy. Then, even if he were trustworthy, are the chains of narration between him and Abu Hanifah in all those hadiths valid? Of course not. So it should be that there is now a book for Abu Hanifah, like the books of some of the Imams, such as Ahmad, Malik, and al-Shafi'i, so that the rule or the idea he proposed can be applied... And even so, it cannot be applied for the reasons we mentioned earlier.
The questioner : One last question.
Another questioner : Okay, our Shaykh, more than one person has narrated to us.
The Shaykh : This man is greedy, but allow him this last question, there is no harm. Yes.
The questioner : Let us make it the second to last.
The Shaykh : In matters of benefit, it is necessary, and greed is a harm. What benefit is there? Yes.
The Shaykh : As for whether this method is acceptable, it is undoubtedly acceptable. But does he, for example, when he authenticates or weakens, follow this path?
The questioner: No.
The Shaykh : So this is a matter of imposing an impossible task. When we say that so-and-so said that al-Bukhari classified him as a narrator of fabricated hadith, what is our position?
The questioner : We follow the Imam.
The Shaykh : We follow the Imam, but if we establish a disagreement with what the Imam said, we oppose him. This is the difference between the one who follows without understanding (mقلid) and the one who follows the evidence (muttabi'). As for this hypothesis brought by the person mentioned earlier, no scholar would say it. If he did say it, he would be the first to contradict it. Yes. And we have hundreds of narrators whom we weaken based solely on the statements of the Imams weakening them, even though for each one of them, only one or two of the Imams have weakened him. But as for Abu Hanifah, there are dozens of those who have weakened him, led by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal. In reality, this is one of the effects of his sectarianism and fanaticism for the Hanafi school. He is now establishing a rule from himself, in which he contradicts the Imams of hadith and the Imams of the principles of jurisprudence. He says this statement, and no scholar would say it at all, even if he were drowning in blind following, if he were sane. Because the etiquette in speech, as he (peace and blessings be upon him) said:
Beware of what you would make excuses for
إياك وما يعتذر منهDo not speak with words for which you will have to apologize before people
لا تكلمَنَّ بكلام تعتذر به عند الناسIn summary: this is a matter of imposing an impossible task, to trace the hadiths of Imam Abu Hanifah. So we say to him now: Where are the hadiths of Abu Hanifah, so that we can rule in his favor or against him?
The questioner : He says in "Jami' al-Masanid," collected by...
The Shaykh : Okay, who is the one who collected the Masanid? Is he trustworthy, or is he accused? It means a vicious circle. He wants to take the hadiths from the book "Jami' al-Masanid," and the one who collected these Masanid is not trustworthy. Then, even if he were trustworthy, are the chains of narration between him and Abu Hanifah in all those hadiths valid? Of course not. So it should be that there is now a book for Abu Hanifah, like the books of some of the Imams, such as Ahmad, Malik, and al-Shafi'i, so that the rule or the idea he proposed can be applied... And even so, it cannot be applied for the reasons we mentioned earlier.
The questioner : One last question.
Another questioner : Okay, our Shaykh, more than one person has narrated to us.
The Shaykh : This man is greedy, but allow him this last question, there is no harm. Yes.
The questioner : Let us make it the second to last.
The Shaykh : In matters of benefit, it is necessary, and greed is a harm. What benefit is there? Yes.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.