Imam Yahya ibn Maʿīn’s Stance on Imam Abu Hanifah: Authentic Analysis

Was Imam Yahya ibn Maʿīn’s Statement on Imam Abu Hanifah Praise or Criticism? A Research Review


Source: Fatāwā ʿIlmiyyah (Tawḍīḥ al-Aḥkām), Vol. 2, p. 389


Question​


Is it true that Imam Yahya ibn Maʿīn (رحمه الله) declared Imam Abu Hanifah (رحمه الله) to be trustworthy (thiqah) or truthful (ṣadūq)? Please provide a research-based clarification.


Answer​


الحمد لله، والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله، أما بعد!


Examination of Narrations Attributing Praise to Imam Abu Hanifah from Imam Ibn Maʿīn​


1️⃣ The “Naʿam Ṣadūq” Narration​


  • Source: Jāmiʿ Bayān al-ʿIlm wa Faḍlihi (Vol. 2, p. 149), Maqām Abī Ḥanīfah by Sarfaraz Khan Safdar (p. 128)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Narrator Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Azdī is weak and criticized (Tārīkh Baghdād Vol. 2, p. 244; Hady al-Sārī, p. 382).
    ❀ The chain from al-Azdī to Ibn Maʿīn is unknown (narration is disconnected).
    ❀ The chain from al-Azdī to Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr is also unknown.

2️⃣ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Baghdādī Narration​


  • Source: Manāqib al-Kardari (Vol. 1, p. 91), Maqām Abī Ḥanīfah (p. 128)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ The narration is unsourced and truncated.
    ❀ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Baghdādī is an unknown figure.

3️⃣ Swearing by Allah that Imam Abu Hanifah is Trustworthy​


  • Source: Manāqib al-Muwaffaq al-Muʿtazilī (Vol. 1, p. 192), Manāqib al-Kardari (Vol. 1, p. 220)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Primary narrator Muwaffaq ibn Ahmad al-Muʿtazilī is a Rāfiḍī, with no proven authentication from reliable scholars.
    ❀ Most narrators in the chain are weak, Rāfiḍī, Muʿtazilī, or unknown.

4️⃣ Muḥammad ibn Saʿd al-ʿAwfī Narration​


  • Source: Tārīkh Baghdād (Vol. 13, p. 419), Tuḥfat al-Aḥwadhī (Introduction, p. 81), Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (Vol. 10, pp. 457–458)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Al-ʿAwfī is considered weak by the majority.
    ❀ His student and the student’s student are both unknown in status.

5️⃣ Ṣāliḥ ibn Muhammad al-Asadī Narration​


  • Source: Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (Vol. 10, p. 450), Tuḥfat al-Aḥwadhī (p. 81)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ The narration is unsourced; no chain exists in any book.

6️⃣ Ahmad ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī’s Statement​


  • Source: al-Khayrāt al-Ḥisān (p. 48)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Unreferenced narration from a later-era scholar with innovated beliefs.

7️⃣ ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ahmad ibn Ibrāhīm al-Dūrī Narration​


  • Source: al-Intiqāʾ by Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (p. 127), al-Jawāhir al-Muḍiyyah (Vol. 1, p. 29)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Ibn al-Dakhīl al-Ṣaydilānī is unknown.
    ❀ His teacher Ahmad ibn al-Ḥasan al-Ḥāfiẓ is not clearly identified.

8️⃣ ʿAbbās ibn Muḥammad al-Dūrī Narration​


  • Source: Tārīkh Baghdād (Vol. 13, p. 449)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Narrator Ahmad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn al-Jārūd al-Raqqī is a liar (Tārīkh Baghdād Vol. 2, p. 247).

9️⃣ Naṣr ibn Muḥammad al-Baghdādī Narration​


  • Source: Tārīkh Baghdād (Vol. 13, p. 449)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Naṣr ibn Muḥammad is unknown.
    ❀ If identified as Miḍar ibn Muḥammad, the chain could be authentic.

🔟 Ahmad ibn Muḥammad al-Qāsim ibn Maḥraz Narration​


  • Source: Tārīkh Baghdād (Vol. 13, p. 449)
  • Reasons for Rejection:
    ❀ Ahmad ibn Muḥammad is unknown.
    ❀ Jaʿfar ibn Durustawayh and Ahmad ibn Masʿadah are both unknown.

Summary of Praise Narrations​


All narrations attributing praise from Imam Ibn Maʿīn to Imam Abu Hanifah are weak or fabricated. None reach the level of ṣaḥīḥ or ḥasan, so they cannot be used as proof.


Claims from Later Centuries​


Statements by scholars such as Ahmad ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī are:
❀ Without chain (bī sanad)
❀ From later centuries
❀ Often traced through weak or innovative narrators


Authentic Narrations of Criticism from Imam Ibn Maʿīn Regarding Imam Abu Hanifah​


1️⃣ “Lā yuktab ḥadīthuh” (His ḥadīth should not be written)


  • Source: al-Kāmil fī Ḍuʿafāʾ al-Rijāl (Vol. 7, p. 2473), Tārīkh Baghdād (Vol. 13, p. 450)
  • Chain: Authentic
  • Narrator: Ibn ʿAdī (trustworthy, moderate)

2️⃣ “Lam yakun fī al-ḥadīth bi shayʾ” (He had no standing in ḥadīth)


  • Source: Kitāb al-Sunnah by ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ahmad (p. 402)
  • Chain: Authentic
  • Narrator: Abū al-Faḍl Ḥātim ibn al-Layth al-Khurasānī (trustworthy)

3️⃣ Rejection of a Mursal Report


  • Statement: “Hādhā min qawl ʿAbd Allāh ibn Shaddād”
  • Source: Min Kalām Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn fī al-Rijāl (p. 121, no. 397)
  • Narrator: Yazīd ibn al-Haytham (trustworthy)

4️⃣ “Kāna yuḍaʿʿaf fī al-ḥadīth” (He was considered weak in ḥadīth)


  • Source: al-Ḍuʿafāʾ by al-ʿUqaylī (Vol. 4, p. 285), Tārīkh Baghdād (Vol. 13, p. 450)
  • Chain: Ḥasan
  • Narrator: Muḥammad ibn ʿUthmān ibn Abī Shaybah (ḥasan al-ḥadīth)

5️⃣ “Abū Yūsuf is more trustworthy than him”


  • Source: Tārīkh Baghdād (Vol. 13, p. 449)
  • Chain: Authentic
  • Narrator: Jaʿfar ibn Abī ʿUthmān al-Ṭayālisī (trustworthy)

Final Conclusion​


No reliable or trustworthy authentication (tawthīq) from Imam Ibn Maʿīn regarding Imam Abu Hanifah exists in ṣaḥīḥ or ḥasan form. On the contrary, multiple authentic and ḥasan chains record criticism (jarḥ) and weakening of Imam Abu Hanifah in ḥadīth matters.


Comment on False Claims​


ʿAbd al-Ghaffār al-Deobandī’s statement that Imam Ibn Maʿīn was “al-Ḥanafī al-Muqallid” is a fabrication. Imam Ibn Maʿīn was neither a muqallid nor a Ḥanafī but a great muḥaddith and eminent scholar.


Hafiz Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr and Ibn al-Qayyim explicitly stated:


قالوا: والمقلد لاعلم له ولم يختلفوا في ذلك (Jāmiʿ Bayān al-ʿIlm wa Faḍlihi Vol. 2, p. 117; Iʿlām al-Muwaqqiʿīn Vol. 2, p. 197)


وإذا كان المقلد ليس من العلماء باتفاق العلماء لم يدخل في شيء من هذه النصوص (Iʿlām al-Muwaqqiʿīn Vol. 2, p. 200)



✅ Research Conclusion:
There is no authentic tawthīq from Imam Ibn Maʿīn for Imam Abu Hanifah. Instead, several authentic narrations establish criticism and weakening of him in the field of ḥadīth.
 
Click to expand...
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top