The Attribution of the Criteria for Critical Appraisal of Content in the Hanafīs’ Hadīth Understanding to Abū Hanīfa
Authors: GÜL Mutlu 
Published: December 2021

Abū Hanīfa Numan b. Sabit is a leading Islamic scholar who lived between the late first and the mid-second century Hijri, (the eighth and ninth centuries A.D.). Except for the six years he spent in the Hejaz, where he performed the Hajj (Muslim pilgrimage), he spent his entire life in Iraq (born in 80 Hijri in Kufa and died in Hijri 150 in Baghdad). The age in which Abū Hanīfa lived is critical for the history of Islamic science, in terms of time and environment. It is a period in which Muslims transitioned from oral tradition to written one, and the hadīths of the Prophet, as well as the views of his Companions and the followers, were recorded, and thus the first forms of Islamic classical sources were formed. The intellectual approach of the Companions who settled there, especially that of ʿAbd Allāh b. Masʿūd, was one of the key factors contribu-ting to the scholarly vitality in Kufa. Abū Hanīfa is a madhab (Islamic school of law) imam who stands out by his considering the “illa and maqasid” (purpose and intention) , along with the general principles and bases in the naṣṣ (in Islamic law to refer to an explicit statement within the Quran or hadith, rather than apparent meanings, due to the influence of the environment in which he lived and the tradition of science in which he was raised. Because of such characteris-tics, he faced criticism while he was still alive. However, his method was adopted and followed by his students that he educated in his fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) academy. In their works Abū Yūsuf (d. 182/798) and Imam Muhammad (d. 189/805) provided an overview of the perspecti-ves of Abū Hanīfa and his companions on furū al-fiqh (branches of Islamic jurisprudence). However, neither the works of Abū Hanīfa nor those of his students about their understanding of usūl have survived to the present day. Yet, this does not mean that the imams in question did not adopt any methods in their idjtihāds (judgement to deduce a law or rule in Islam). The usūl (principle) they followed while making judgements from the verses and hadīths was deduced by later Hanafī scholars through takhrīj (the method of determining the original sources), based on the provisions in the works written about furū al-fiqh (branches). Thus, they not only tried to show that the provisions adopted by the madhab are based on solid principles but also pre-vented the criticisms against the madhab. In this respect, the understanding of the Hanafī usūl could be said to have a close connection with the science of khilāf and jadal (the science of dis-pute and discussion between the muslim jurisprudents). The views of Abū Hanīfa and his com-panions on accepting and rejecting hadīths are discussed in detail in the sections about Sunnah (the Prophetic tradition) in Hanafī principles of jurisprudence. In the Hanafī usūl, the interrup-tion in the sanad (chain of hadith) of the narrations is classified into two categories: literal (zāhirī) and hidden (batini) interruption. The former refers to the disconnection that is apparent in the narration, whereas the latter is the critical appraisal criteria mentioned as content apprai-sal in the title of the of this study, and it means the criticism of the narrations by presenting them to the evidence called aṣl (principal). The Hanafīs think that khabar al-āhād cannot be accepted in the following four cases: If it conflicts with a provision in the Qurʾān, if it declares a judgment contrary to a well-known Sunnah; in the event that the khabar al-wāhid (solitary re-port) is transmitted from a single Companion although the issue in question is something that everyone should know (umūm al-balwā), and finally if it is determined that the Companions did not act upon the decree of the khabar al-wāhid even though they were aware of it. The Hanafī usūl scholars did not hesitate to attribute these appraisal criteria they obtained through takhrīj, regarding both the sanad and the text of the narrations to Abū Hanīfa. As noted in the present study, the sources of fiqh mention the opinions conveyed by Abū Hanīfa himself regarding the first two criteria; that is, the verification of the khabar with the Qurʾān and the famous Sunnah. Although Abū Hanīfa did not directly mentioned the verification of khabar al-āhād through umūm al-balwā and through the practice of the Companions, these principles, which were de-duced from the classical Hanafī sources through takhrīj, were normally used by Abū Hanīfa and his companions. This study discusses this issue based on evidence from narrations.