Following the Imam is Following the Messenger of Allah
He states that if the follower’s statement conflicts with the Prophet’s, then the Prophet’s statement will be accepted. If the follower’s statement conflicts with the Prophet’s, or even if a conflict is assumed, then the remedy should be determined by the Prophet himself. Shah Waliullah (رحمہ اللہ) has explained this. Please observe:
(ما اقتدينا بأمامنا الالعلمنا انه اعلم منا بكتاب الله وسنة رسوله ) (حجة البالغد)
We follow our Imam only because he knows the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم better than us.
The deniers of Hadith, by confusing Creator and creation, abandoned the Hadith of the Prophet ﷺ; you, by confusing the Prophet and the follower, have abandoned the jurisprudence of the jurists. You call yourselves Ahl-e-Hadith and the deniers of Hadith call themselves Ahl-e-Quran.
The Answer:
Firstly:-
We have already responded in detail to the resemblance of the Hadith deniers, stating that they have come into existence in the light of your own statements. Moreover, if the denial of Hadith is likened to abandoning jurisprudence, then you too are involved in this ماشاء اللہ because you have also admitted to abandoning Hanafi jurisprudence in opposition to the Hadith; this is the stance of Ahl al-Hadith.
Maulana Muhammad Ismail Salafi, may Allah have mercy on him, writes in the preface of Hasan al-Bayan that “Hundreds of such details exist in the offices of established jurisprudence, which strongly shake the grasp of reason, transmission, and consciousness; except for imitation and partisanship, the mind is not prepared to accept them.”
These remarks do not mean that all issues of Hanafi jurisprudence are superficial and based on carelessness; rather, in some places, extremely deep understanding and thoroughness have been applied, and a very cautious approach has been adopted. Therefore, the opinion of farsighted and investigative scholars is that one should not have absolute allegiance to any of these established sects but should act upon خذ ماصفاء دع ما کدر.
Secondly:-
The passage you quoted from “حجۃ اللہ البافتہ” attributed to Hazrat Shah Waliullah (may Allah have mercy on him) has been examined by us in the relevant discussions on “حجۃ اللہ” in Taqlid (imitation), but we did not find it there. To call it a lie and fabrication would be disrespectful to you. Perhaps you copied it from some pamphlet without verifying it; otherwise, this mistake would not have occurred. In any case, even if this statement is accepted, why did Imam Abu Hanifa not follow Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with him), who was more knowledgeable? In a debate with Imam Shafi’i, Imam Muhammad admitted that Imam Malik had more knowledge of the Quran, Hadith, and the practices of the Companions than Imam Abu Hanifa. To this, Imam Shafi’i (may Allah have mercy on him) addressed Imam Muhammad saying:
(قال الشافعي فلم يبق الا القياس والقياس لا يكون الاعلى هذه الاشياء فعلی ای شی نقیس )
Imam Shafi’i said that now only Qiyas (analogical reasoning) remains, and Qiyas is applied to those matters, so on what basis will you both compete now?
Imam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) has narrated from Imam Shafi’i (may Allah have mercy on him) in this way:
(ما بقى بيننا وبينكم الا القياس ، ونحن نقول بالقياس ولكن من كان بالاصول اعلم كان قياسه اصح)
Meaning, now only Qiyas remains between us and you, which we also accept, but the one who knows the principles (Quran, Hadith, and the practices of the Companions) better will have better Qiyas.
Thirdly:-
As for your claim that the contradictions should merely be assumed, perhaps you want to convey through this statement that the issues in Hanafi jurisprudence that contradict the Quran and Hadith are just fictional stories, whereas it is an open reality that among the four Imams, the most contradictions with the Quran and Sunnah are found in Hanafi jurisprudence.
Maulana Abul Kalam Azad states:
“It can be proven with undeniable evidence that no jurisprudence is as much against the secrets of Shariah as Hanafi jurisprudence.”
This is the testimony of a person whom the Deobandis consider Hanafi.
Even the students of the Imam himself have disagreed with him on one-third of the issues, the details of which follow. So are all these just fictional stories? Moreover, the author has dedicated an entire chapter ahead, quoting Hanafi jurists. If you have the courage, prove every issue from the Quran and Sunnah, otherwise, the people of reason and intellect will consider your claim merely the foolish ramblings of a madman.
