If a follower of the Sunnah narrates a hadith to the Deobandis that goes against their mimetic sect, the Deobandis say that there is much disagreement in the hadith, while Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, gave fatwas according to such hadiths which are from later periods.
However, Imam Abu Hanifa had said to Qadi Abu Yusuf:
ويحك يا يعقوب! لا تكتب كل ما تسمع مني فإني قد أرى الر أى اليوم وأتركه غدا وأرى الر أى غدا وأتركه بعد غد
O Yaqub (Abu Yusuf), may you be ruined, do not write down everything I say; today I have one opinion and tomorrow it changes. If tomorrow I have another opinion, the day after that it also changes.
Sayyiduna Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-As says that whatever I heard from the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, I used to write it down with the intention of memorization and preservation. The Quraysh forbade me from this, saying that you write down everything the Prophet, peace be upon him, says, while he is a human being who speaks in states of anger and pleasure.
Abdullah bin Amr says: I stopped writing hadith, then I mentioned this to the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, and he pointed with his blessed finger towards his blessed mouth and said: Write it down, by the One in whose hand is my soul, only truth comes out of this mouth.
Imam Hafs bin Ghiyath, may Allah have mercy on him, said: I had a gathering with Abu Hanifa; he would give ten fatwas on each issue. We could not know which fatwa to follow, and he himself would refer back to them. In one gathering, he gave five fatwas on the same issue. When I saw this state and condition of his, I abandoned him and turned towards hadith.
And the students of Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, also differed with him on many issues. In fact, the scholar Ibn Abidin Shami of the Deobandis and Barelvis wrote:
فحصل المخالفة الصاحبين فى نحو ثلث المذهب
Meaning the two masters differed in about one-third of the religion.
Now, from the authentic books of the Deobandis, as an example, different opinions of Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, on a single issue are presented:
1) Different opinions regarding reciting Surah Al-Fatiha in the last two units of the obligatory prayers:
One opinion is that in the last two Rak’ahs, one should not recite Surah Al-Fatiha at all, or it is permissible to say only SubhanAllah Subhan (Glory be to Allah, Glory).
Apart from the mentioned Deobandi scholars and their elders, many from the Deobandi group consider reciting Surah Al-Fatiha in the last two Rak’ahs not obligatory but recommended. However, contrary to all these, the Deobandi Imam Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi wrote:
Sixth objection: Mubarakpuri Sahib writes that from the Hadith of Hazrat Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him), it is understood that reciting Surah Al-Fatiha in every Rak’ah of the prayer is necessary and without it, the prayer is invalid. Whereas the Hanafis say that if Surah Al-Fatiha is not recited in the last two Rak’ahs, the prayer is still valid. So, the Hanafi practice is also not based on the Hadith of Jabir.
Answer: “Mubarakpuri Sahib has also quoted some statements of jurists to prove his claim, but does the Maulana not know that not every Hadith attributed to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is actually said by him, nor is it practically established from him? Rather, many of these Hadiths are fabricated, forged, weak, rare, rejected, or defective, etc. Similarly, here you can understand that not every detail of Hanafi jurisprudence is from Imam Abu Hanifa’s sayings, nor is every detail applicable, and the mistakes and errors of a Mujtahid are additional to this. Then, considering the non-infallible opinions of some jurists as definitive and necessary and attributing the entire Hanafi school to them and then basing objections on that is purely false and rejected. And if some have written so, it does not close the door to attributing it to forgetfulness or error, and the difference between rulings of the time of obligation and forgetfulness is not hidden.
But in the matter under discussion, this narration is transmitted from Imam Abu Hanifa that recitation of Surah Al-Fatiha in the last two Rak’ahs is necessary, and this narration was preferred and favored by Hafiz Ibn Hammam.
And Hazrat Shah Sahib…”
From the above detail, it is understood that the followers of Taqlid have not yet reached a unanimous decision regarding the two contradictory statements of Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him) about which is correct, weak, or abrogating and abrogated.
Also, the narration from Abu Hanifa by Muhammad bin Hasan al-Shibani is perhaps considered doubtful by the Deobandi group.
2) Different opinions regarding the time of Zuhr and Asr prayers:
Saeed Ahmad Palanpuri and Ameen Okara Deobandi have written:
And four narrations have been transmitted from Imam Azam in this regard.
(1) In the apparent narration, the time of Zuhr ends at two Muthals, and immediately after that, the time of Asr begins. This is the Mufti’s opinion. Allama Kasani wrote in ”بدائع الصنائع“ that this statement is not explicitly mentioned in the apparent narration. Imam Muhammad only wrote that according to Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), the time of Asr begins after two Muthals (i.e., from the third Muthal). Imam Muhammad did not specify when exactly the time of Zuhr ends.
(2) The second opinion of Imam Azam is the same as that of the three Imams and the Sahaba. Imam Tahawi (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted this, and Sahib Dur Mukhtar wrote that nowadays people act according to this and fatwas are issued on this basis. Sayyid Ahmad Dahlan Shafi’i referred to this opinion of Imam Sahib in خزانة المفتيين and Fatawa Zahiriyah, but this reference is not mentioned in our books. Rather, this opinion is considered a narration from Hasan bin Ziyad Logawi, and Sarkhasi mentioned it in Mabsut as narrated by Imam Muhammad. Sahib Dur Mukhtar, who called this opinion the Mufti’s, was refuted by Allama Shami.
(3) The third narration from Imam Azam is that the second Muthal is an ambiguous time, meaning the time of Zuhr ends at one Muthal, and the time of Asr begins after two Muthals, and the second Muthal is neither Zuhr time nor Asr time. This is the narration of Asad bin Amr from Imam Azam.
(4) The fourth opinion mentioned in Umdat al-Qari Sharh Bukhari is that the time of Zuhr ends a little before two Muthals, and the time of Asr begins after two Muthals. Imam Karkhi has authenticated this opinion.
3) Different Opinions Regarding the Imam Saying Ameen:
One opinion is that both the Imam and the followers should say Ameen quietly.
The second opinion: Muhammad bin Hasan Shaybani, a student of Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, said:
فأما أبو حنيفة فقال يؤمن من خلف الإمام ولا يؤمن الإمام
Meaning Abu Hanifa says that the follower should say Ameen behind the Imam, and the Imam should not say Ameen.
4) Different Opinions Regarding the Imam Standing in the Funeral Prayer:
Sahib Hidayah has written that it is narrated from Abu Hanifa that for a man’s funeral, one should stand opposite the head, and for a woman’s funeral, one should stand at the middle. Because Hazrat Anas did the same and said that this is the Sunnah.
Whereas, contrary to this, Zahoor Allah Bari Azmi Deobandi has written: “Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, based on other evidences, said that the Imam should stand in front of the chest for both men and women.”
Muhammad Taqi Usmani Deobandi also said: “The Shafi’i school holds that the Imam should stand opposite the head for a man’s funeral and at the middle for a woman’s funeral, while Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, has two narrations on this issue, one according to the Shafi’i view, and Imam Tahawi preferred this and also narrated it from Imam Abu Yusuf.”
5) Different Opinions Regarding the Water Used for Washing a Horse:
Mufti Jameel Ahmad Sukhrudvi, a scholar of Darul Uloom Deoband from the Deoband family, has written: Whether the horse is male or female, its saliva is considered pure by the scholars because its meat is edible, and the saliva of that which has edible meat is pure. There are four narrations from Imam Azam Abu Hanifa:
(1) That besides water, performing wudu with anything else is disliked.
(2) That like its meat, its saliva is also disliked.
(3) That it is doubtful like the pig’s saliva.
(4) That it is pure.
Jameel Ahmad Deobandi has classified the last opinion as belonging to the Christian religion.
6) Three opinions regarding wudu with Nabidh:
Jameel Ahmad Deobandi has written:
The issue is that if there is no water available other than date wine, then three narrations have been transmitted from Hazrat Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, regarding this matter:
(1) It is mentioned in Jami’ Saghir and Ziyadat that one should perform wudu with date wine and not perform tayammum.
(2) Imam Sahib, may Allah have mercy on him, said that in my view, performing wudu with date wine and tayammum with soil is more preferable.
(3) Nuh ibn Abi Maryam and Hasan bin Ziyad narrated that one should perform tayammum and not perform wudu with date wine.
Also, Taqi Usmani Deobandi has transmitted three opinions of Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, regarding wudu with a type of wine. Some Hanafis prefer one opinion, while others prefer another. For details, see Dars Tirmidhi
7) Different opinions of Imam Abu Hanifa regarding donkey sweat:
Jameel Ahmad Deobandi has written: “There are three narrations from Hazrat Imam Azam regarding the sweat of a donkey:
(1) It is pure; the sweat of a donkey does not prevent the validity of prayer.
(2) It is a light impurity.
(3) It is a heavy impurity. But according to the famous narration, it is pure, therefore its saliva will also be pure.”
Regarding the saliva of a donkey, Sahib al-Hidayah has only quoted one opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him, that the saliva of a donkey is impure.
8) Different opinions regarding turning one’s back towards the Qiblah while relieving oneself:
Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi has written:
Hazrat Imam Abu Hanifa, may Allah have mercy on him (ورواية عن أحمد بن حنبل رحمہ اللہ ), says: “Facing the wall or the open desert is forbidden everywhere.”
Sarfaraz Safdar has also written another opinion as follows: “The school of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, as narrated by Tirmidhi, is that facing the wall or the open desert is impermissible everywhere, and turning one’s back is permissible everywhere. (There is also a narration like this from the Imam himself.
quoting from al-Ayni)
Note: By istiqbal (facing) is meant facing the Qiblah, and by istidbar (turning back) is meant turning the back. Binyan means a building or shelter, and sahra means an open place.
9) Different opinions regarding the number of Sunnah prayers after Jumu’ah prayer:
Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi has written:
“The summary is that before Friday, there are four Rak’ahs of Sunnah. There is a difference of opinion regarding the Sunnahs after Friday; four Rak’ahs are narrated from Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him) and six Rak’ahs from Imam Abu Yusuf. This is the stance mentioned in the common books of Fiqh, and Mufti has declared according to Imam Abu Yusuf, but the correct view is that Imam Sahib also believed in six Rak’ahs. Imam Sadr al-A’immah al-Makki in Manaqib al-Imam al-Azam
writes with his chain of narration:
قال أبو إسماعيل الفارسي رأيت سفيان ومسهرا وأبا حنيفة ومالك بن مغول وزائدة يصلون بعد الجمعة ستا وثلاثين وأربعا
Similarly, Imam Kardari has written in his book Manaqib Kardari Vol 2 p. 244: two first, four later.”
Dear readers! You have seen that contrary to the opinion of common Fiqh books, Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi relied on the narration of Muwaffaq bin Ahmad al-Makki (Akhtab Khwarazmi)
, who is considered a severely weak narrator by the Deobandis. Muhammad Nafi Deobandi has summarized about Muwaffaq al-Makki (Akhtab Khwarazmi) from Shah Abdul Aziz Dehlawi: Akhtab Khwarazmi is an extremist Zaydi Shia. The Ahl al-Sunnah hadith scholars unanimously agree that all the narrations of this mentioned Zaydi Akhtab are transmitted from unknown and weak people, and most of his narrations are against reliable narrators and are fabricated. The Sunni jurists never use his narrations as evidence or argument.
And Mahmood Alam Okara Deobandi has written
that it is obligatory to declare all Zaydi Shias as disbelievers.
If the Zaydi Shias want to avoid the Takfir of the Ahl al-Deoband, they must speak about the virtues of Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him). For example, Imam Ibn Jurayj (may Allah have mercy on him) is called various derogatory names by the Ahl Koh Jail Shiyabazi and others, but if he said anything in favor of Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), he was given the title of a great Muhaddith by the Ahl al-Deoband.
10) Which method of moving water is considered valid to check whether the water of a pond is little or abundant? Imam Abu Hanifa has different opinions on this:
Mufti Jameel Ahmad of the Deoband school, while translating Hidayah, wrote:
Translation: A large pond is one whose one edge does not move by moving the other edge. When impurity falls on one side, ablution is permissible from the other side because it is apparent that the impurity has not reached the other side, as the effect of moving water spreads more than the effect of impurity. Then there is a narration from Abu Hanifa that the movement which is valid is the one caused by bathing, and this is also the opinion of Abu Yusuf. There is also a narration from Imam Sahib that movement caused by hand is valid. And from Imam Muhammad, there is a narration that movement caused along with ablution is valid.
11) Used water, meaning the water that has been used for ablution, regarding its purity or impurity according to Imam Abu Hanifa may Allah have mercy on him, three different opinions:
(1) Jameel Ahmad Deobandi wrote: “Imam Muhammad said, and this narration is from Imam Azam Abu Hanifa, that used water is pure but not purified.”
(2) Jameel Ahmad Deobandi wrote: “Then the belief of Hasan bin Ziyad is that used water is impure with severe impurity, and this is narrated from Imam Abu Hanifa.”
(3) Jameel Ahmad Deobandi wrote: “And the belief of Abu Yusuf is that it is impure with light impurity, and this too is a narration from Abu Hanifa.”
12) If a janabi (one in a state of major ritual impurity) dives into a well, different opinions regarding whether the janabi becomes pure or not:
Jameel Ahmad Deobandi, while translating Hidayah, wrote:
Translation: And when the camel dived into the well to extract water, according to Abu Yusuf, the man is considered junub (in a state of major ritual impurity) in his condition because no water was found flowing over the body. Although, according to Abu Yusuf, this is a condition for the obligation to be lifted, and the water itself is pure in its state because both conditions cannot coexist. According to Imam Muhammad, both are pure: the man because flowing is not a condition, and the water because there is no intention of proximity. According to Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), both are impure: the water because it removes the obligation in the first contact from some limbs, and the man because the remaining limbs still have ritual impurity. It is said that according to the Imam, the impurity of the man is due to the impurity of the used water. And it is narrated from the Imam that the man becomes pure because the water is not commanded to be used before separation. This narration from the Imam is the most consistent among all narrations.
Dear readers! These are a dozen opinions attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), quoted as a sample from a large collection, but the Deobandi school even claims that all the sayings of Muhammad bin Hasan Shibani, Abu Yusuf, and Zufar (may Allah have mercy on them) are also the sayings of Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him). Amin Okara Deobandi wrote: “It is stated in Shami that Imam Abu Yusuf, Imam Muhammad, Imam Hasan, Imam Zufar all strongly declared that every statement of ours is transmitted from the Imam himself.”
However, there is so much disagreement among these opinions that counting them is very difficult for me. Discerning readers should consult the translation and commentary of Hidayah, i.e., Ashraf al-Hidayah.
As a sample, I will quote only one example here. Mufti Jameel Ahmad of the Deobandi school, while translating Hidayah, wrote:
Translation: Then if a goat urinates in the water container, according to Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf, the entire water should be discarded. Imam Muhammad (may Allah be pleased with him) said that no water should be discarded unless the urine predominates over the water, causing the water to lose its purifying property. The root of this disagreement is that the urine of an animal whose meat is eaten is considered pure by Imam Muhammad, but impure by the two Sheikhs (Abu Hanifa and Abu Yusuf). Imam Muhammad’s evidence is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) commanded the ‘Araniyyun to drink camel urine and milk. The evidence of the two Sheikhs is the hadith: “Keep yourself pure from urine, for most of the punishment in the grave is because of it.” Without going into detail, and because ماكول اللحم the urine of an animal becomes foul-smelling and corrupt, it is treated like the urine of a non-meat-eating animal. The interpretation of the hadith narrated by Imam Muhammad is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) knew the cure of the ‘Araniyyun by revelation. Then, according to Imam Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him), drinking the urine of a meat-eating animal as medicine is also not permissible because the cure is not certain in this urine; therefore, it will not be avoided due to prohibition. According to Imam Abu Yusuf, drinking it for medicinal purposes is permissible because of the story of the ‘Araniyyun. According to Imam Muhammad (may Allah be pleased with him), drinking it is permissible both for medicinal and non-medicinal purposes because it is pure according to him.
