What is the grade of Abu Hanifah’s (may Allah have mercy on him) narration of the hadith?

The questioner : A questioner asks: What is your opinion regarding what Abu Hanifah narrated? And does his hadith reach the level of hasan after Ibn Ma’in and others authenticated him, as in *al-Siyar* and *al-Tahdhib*?

The Shaykh : As in what?

The questioner : *Al-Siyar* and *al-Tahdhib*.

The Shaykh : *Al-Siyar* and *al-Tahdhib*. Abu Hanifah’s hadith is not considered hasan by any of the people of hadith, absolutely. The best of its status according to some of them is that it may be used as corroborating evidence, but it cannot be used as a proof. As for what is narrated from Ibn Ma’in that he authenticated him, that is a weaker narration for two reasons, or rather, three reasons:
The first reason is that it has been narrated from Ibn Ma’in that he weakened him.
The second reason is that the majority are of the opinion that he is weak and that his hadith is anomalous.
The third and final reason is that the criticism of a narrator takes precedence over his vindication—and peace be upon you—especially if the criticism is explained, and more specifically if this explanation comes from the majority of those who spoke about the narrator. In that case, there is no room for prioritizing the authentication of one who authenticated him over the criticism of one who criticized him. This is because the criticism, even though it comes from the same person who authenticated him in one narration, comes from the majority of the most numerous of the imams, and it comes with the reason for the criticism explained. That reason is his inconsistency in narrating hadiths, his attributing to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) some hadiths that stop at a Companion, and his connecting some hadiths that are missing the Companion link, and so on. Thus, the criticism of the Imam (may Allah have mercy on him) is an explained criticism. Even if the ratio between those who weakened him and those who authenticated him were reversed—that is, if the authenticators were the majority and the weakeners were the minority—in that case, the weakening of the minority would be prioritized because it is accompanied by an explanation of the defect, and it is not the statement of the majority. So what is your opinion when the reality is the exact opposite? The majority who spoke about Abu Hanifah weakened him, and then they explained the reason for the weakness. For example, Ibn Hibban says in his biography of him that he narrates anomalies from famous narrators. The Imam Muslim says in his book *al-Wuhdan* that he is inconsistent in his hadith. The Imam al-Bukhari says about him: he narrates anomalies—or he has anomalies—I do not recall the exact wording now. I had mentioned the statements of those who criticized him in *Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Da’ifah wa al-Mawdu’ah*. Therefore, Abu Hanifah’s (may Allah have mercy on him) hadith cannot be considered hasan in itself, but it can be strengthened by other evidence. And as I also mentioned there, this does not detract from Abu Hanifah’s status as one of the great scholars of the Salaf and one of their jurists. But jurisprudence is one thing, and narration is another. As the Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) said, as narrated by Muslim in the introduction to his *Sahih*: “In Medina, there are men from whom we seek blessing or ask for supplication, but we do not narrate any hadith from them.”
We ask for their supplication because of their righteousness, but we do not narrate hadith from them because of their weakness. Therefore, there is no necessary connection between a man being a jurist and being a trustworthy narrator. One of these qualities may be separated from the other. This is what happened regarding Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him); he is a jurist, but he is not a proof if he is the sole narrator of a hadith.
Other than that?

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good.

The Shaykh : And beware of that.