Talk:Hanafi school

message: The article says blasphemy is not punishable under Hanafi law, but it doesn't mention apostasy. This information would be a valuable addition, particularly with the Abdul Rahman (convert) case so topical; Hanafi law is the default system in the Constitution of Afghanistan, and the Constitution is silent on apostasy. — JEREMY 08:16, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Blasphemy and Apostasy

message: "it is considered to be the school most open to modern ideas"
Alright, but just to clear this up, wasn't the Taliban a Hanafi group? Or were they influenced by Wahhabism? At any rate, even Wahhabis are not as strict and fannatical as they. Giorgioz 16:03, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the Taliban Hanafi? 

message: The article describes at length the places/cultures in which Hanafi school is predominant and it talks about it being a conservative school of Sunni Islam, but the one thing it fails to do is describe what Hanafi actually is, i.e. what its core beliefs that distinguish it from other schools within Sunni Islam. Can someone with some knowledge on this expand/clean up the article to get this key point across? -- Hux 16:40, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: So...what is it?

message: "Faith neither increases nor decreases" and that "Actions are not a part of faith" is the standpoint of the Shafi mzahab and not Hanafi. Imam Abu Hanifa's opinion is that Faith increases and decreases AND actions are part of faith. But obviously I need to provide a proof. In any case I think this statement needs a proof.
What? Where's your source for that? Imam Shafie was famous for his debate with the people of Irja' or the Murjiah, whom believed that action are not part of faith. 
In fact, it was well known that Abu Hanifah and Imam Haramain Al-Juwaini held that action are not part of faith, however, there are indications that they both retracted this view latter in their lives. 
210.195.104.253 (talk) 07:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't it the other way around? 

message: someone has claimed in the article that hanafi school allows praying in languages other than arabic which i don't believe is correct, could not verify this anywhere in any source posted or elsewhere. consulted others for advice, this does not appear to be true but if it is it is a unique claim that should definitely provide some documentation for support. for the moment i think it should be removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sawyer207 (talk • contribs) 03:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  reciting quran in languages other than arabic? 

message: Content was recently merged from Sunni Islam, though the more relevant discussion can be found on that article's talk page. Per Wikipedia:Merging, however, I am still required to open a discussion here. I would suggest reading my comments on Talk:Sunni Islam first. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: The article treats the subject of how the Hanafi School was applied several centuries ago, but since it is not applied in that way in Bosnia, Albania, Turkey or India today, it would be interesting and clarifying to read something about its present-day application, written by someone who knows something about it.
81.236.219.119 (talk) 12:03, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia is not a blog, and does not summarize what "I am a Muslim myself and my religion does not or does..." type personal opinions. For why, read WP:WWIN. Study WP:PG for content guidelines. The aim of wiki articles is neither to criticize nor praise Islam, the aim is to just summarize verifiable recent reliable sources, see WP:V and WP:RS for more. RLoutfy (talk) 02:44, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Application today 

message: Please see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Islam#NPOV issues in Hanafi, Maliki and Shafi'i. Eperoton (talk) 22:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV issues 

message: You may have noticed that the edit summary for removal of the content you have restored included a link to a discussion on a wiki project. You'll have to look in the archives for it now, but the result was a WP:CONSENSUS that inclusion of that material in this article violated WP policy. That means you should not restore it without obtaining a new consensus for its inclusion. I'll summarize the rationale for you here. Per WP:PROPORTION, the coverage of a subject on WP has to reflect its coverage in RSs. There are a number of RSs on the Hanafi school whose scope is similar to this article, such as EI2 (paywall), Iranica,  The Oxford International Encyclopedia of Legal History (paywall), The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World. A selective focus on Hanafi views about certain topics like apostasy, slavery, etc does not reflect how the subject is treated in RSs, and so it violates the relevant policy, WP:NPOV. Instead, these views should be discussed in Apostasy in Islam, Islamic views on slavery, etc, which does reflect how RSs treat those subjects.
Your added material on intoxicating beverages would make a good addition to Khamr, so I'm moving it there. However, there are some issues with it, which I'll take up on the talk page for that article. Eperoton (talk) 14:30, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV redux 

message: It is not very clear what the Hanafi believe. I did not find it during a quick but complete read-through, even though their views should have both their own section and a prominent place (at least a paragraph) in the lead. I don't know anything about the Hanafi or Islam in general, or I would fix this myself: perhaps someone else can take care of it? —Compassionate727 (T·C) 18:13, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: What you're looking for is summarized in the section "Sources and methodology", albeit there's room for improvement. Islamic schools of law mostly differ is rather technical aspects of their legal methodology and in various consequences these have on specific rulings. It's difficult to find a concise summary in reputable sources (as opposed to some weak sources which oversimplify the matters). Eperoton (talk) 03:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Views 

message: Please add criticism on hanafi fiqh.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiacc97 (talk • contribs) 13:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism on Hanafi fiqh 

message: Please, correct in the article that Spain and Morocco were and are followers of the Maliki Madhab, except for small groups that follow other schools in present-day Spain. 45.142.46.127 (talk) 17:28, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Al Andalus and Marocco  

message: The manual of style outlines that dates can be given in the Hijri calendar when it is relevant, but should be followed by the Gregorian conversion. I think this is a good idea, as the Gregorian dates are relevant in an English language article. I would suggest that phrases such as "the 3rd Hijri century" should be replaced with "the 3rd century AH (9th century CE) throughout this article. Qntmnan (talk) 15:46, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates 

message: The introduction for this article could be improved. I think the main questions that need to be answered in the introduction are: 
# What are the sources from which Hanafi laws are derived? (e.g., Hadith, Sunnah, Quran?)
# What are the acceptable methods by which you should investigate and draw conclusions from those source? (e.g., rational inquiry, analogical reasoning, literal interpretation, diplomatic consensus?)
# When was Hanafism established, and, briefly, how?
# What is Hanafism's role in the present day Islamic world?
Some of these points are already covered, but in particular, the first two are not. Also, I think what is there should be condensed, and superfluous information (such as who compiled it) should be moved elsewhere or removed. Qntmnan (talk) 23:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improving the Introduction