Abu Hanifah by Mohammed Akram Nadwi

Author:Mohammed Akram Nadwi
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: Kube Publishing Ltd

AHL AL-RAY AND AHL AL-ḤADĪTH

In this section I take up the question of why Abū Ḥanīfah was the object of criticism from a group of scholars – or, rather, a tendency among scholars – later known by the shorthand label ahl al-ḥadīth, ‘the people of ḥadīth’. That label was used in contradistinction to ahl alra y, ‘the people of opinion’, meaning people who preferred their own opinion or judgement rather than the Sunnah, which was preserved in the ḥadīth of the Prophet and the āthār of the Companions. In the previous chapter I recorded some instances where an eminent scholar, who had held a negative opinion of Abū Ḥanīfah, revised that opinion when he got to know the work or the man better. It is indeed the case that the criticisms of Abū Ḥanīfah’s fiqh are based upon lack of information or misinformation about him or ‘the people of Iraq’ generally. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to reflect on the fact of criticism because it helps one to appreciate more fully the nature of Abū Ḥanīfah’s achievement. We must begin by differentiating the disciplines of ḥadīth and fiqh.

Already by the time of Abū Ḥanīfah, that is the generation of the students of the Successors, the disciplines of ḥadīth and fiqh were differentiated. Even in the generation of the Companions, the number of people relied upon for fiqh and ijtihād was fewer than 120, while thousands were relied on for transmission of ḥadīths. The same proportion, with greatly increased numbers, obtained in later generations. The reason is that reliable transmission of a report demands ability to preserve it accurately in memory or writing, then to transmit and pass it on without amendment or alteration. The effort to do ijtihād, on the other hand, demands expertise in Arabic, the language of the source texts (Qurān and ḥadīths), the ability to bring to bear on an issue the relevant, different texts and to sift their juristic implications, to reconcile apparent differences among them, while at the same time understanding the purposes and principles expressed in the sources at a level of generality sufficient to enable application in different circumstances. There were some highly talented individuals whose abilities encompassed accurate, comprehensive preservation and transmission of ḥadīths, and the understanding of these texts as law (fiqh). Even so, there was a division of emphasis, of tendency, reflecting a different understanding of what it was best, at that time, to do in the interest of preserving the religion.

Some sensed danger in circulating ḥadīths whose context had not been fully or accurately remembered and whose implications were therefore not always evident. The danger was that one risked extending the authority of the Prophet’s teaching and example to some attitude or practice which, because not properly understood, was inconsistent with some other attitude or practice, or which led to behaviour that, overall, was taking people away from the Sunnah. On the other side, people sensed danger in deriving from the ḥadīths laws and legal principles that were not directly and explicitly expressed in that way in the ḥadīths themselves.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.