Question: Was Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) a Tabi’i? And is his meeting with any Companion proven by an authentic chain?
(Safdar Nazeer son of Manzoor Ilahi, shopkeeper, Bhakkar)
Answer: الحمد لله رب العالمين و الصلوة والسلام على رسوله الأمين، أما بعد:
On this issue there is intense disagreement among the scholars. Some say that Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) was a Tabi’i, and some say that Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) was not a Tabi’i. Before commenting on the views of these two groups, two very important fundamental points are presented.
First: Any statement or narration cited as evidence from a book must have a chain that is sahih li-dhatihi or hasan li-dhatihi; otherwise the argument is rejected.
Second: In the face of a sahih proof, all da’if and unproven evidences are rejected, even if their number runs into the thousands.
After this introduction, the views of both sides are presented.
First side:
Khatib al-Baghdadi (may Allah have mercy on him, d. 463 AH) writes:
النعمان بن ثابت أبو حنيفة التيمي إمام أصحاب الرأي وفقيه أهل العراق، رأي أنس بن مالك و سمع عطاء بن أبى رباح…
“That is: Nu’man ibn Thabit, Abu Hanifah al-Taymi, the imam of the People of Opinion and the jurist of the Iraqis; he saw Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) and heard from Ata ibn Abi Rabah (narrations and so on).”
Many later scholars have relied on this statement of Khatib (may Allah have mercy on him). For example, see al-Ilal al-Mutanahiyah of Ibn al-Jawzi
. Some people have attributed Ibn al-Jawzi’s statement to al-Daraqutni; this is a very great mistake. See al-Lamahat
.
Second side:
Abu al-Hasan al-Daraqutni (may Allah have mercy on him, d. 385 AH) was asked whether Abu Hanifah’s hearing from Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) is sahih. He answered: لا ولا رؤيته، لم يلحق أبو حنيفة أحدا من الصحابة
No, and nor is Abu Hanifah’s seeing Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) established; rather Abu Hanifah did not meet any Companion at all.
It is thus clear that long before Khatib al-Baghdadi, Imam al-Daraqutni (may Allah have mercy on him) had clearly declared that Imam Abu Hanifah neither saw Sayyidna Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) nor met him.
Note: The earlier statement of the highly esteemed and moderate Imam al-Daraqutni (may Allah have mercy on him) has been printed in a distorted and altered form in the book “Tabyid al-Sahifah fi Manaqib al-Imam Abi Hanifah” by Allama al-Suyuti (d. 911 AH) (p. 10, with the annotation of Muhammad Ashiq Ilahi Barni Deobandi).
This altered text is rejected because it contradicts the original authentic books. The texts of Dhayl al-Lali and others show that this error itself arose from Allama al-Suyuti not understanding that the statement was Ibn al-Jawzi’s. In any case, against the statement proven from Imam al-Daraqutni, the references of Suyuti, Ibn al-Jawzi and others are rejected.
Between the statements of the two (Khatib and Daraqutni), the statement of Daraqutni has preference because he is earlier and more trustworthy. The decisive argument of the first side: those who consider or make others consider Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) a Tabi’i present a famous argument.
Muhammad ibn Sa’d (scribe of al-Waqidi) said (in al-Tabaqat):
حدثنا أبو الموفق سيف بن جابر قاضي واسط قال: سمعت أبا حنيفة يقول : قدم أنس بن مالك الكوفة و نزل النخع و كان يخضب بالحمرة، قد رأيته مرارا
The summary of this narration is that (Imam) Abu Hanifah said that I saw (Sayyidna) Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) in Kufa.
It should be noted that the basic narrator of this narration, Sayf ibn Jabir, is majhul al-hal (of unknown condition). No tawthiq (authentication) of him has been found in any reliable book.
Secondly, this narration is not present in Ibn Sa’d’s book الطبقات. It has been narrated by al-Hakim al-Kabir Abu Ahmad Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Ishaq (d. 378 AH) with the following chain and text.
حدثني أبو بكر بن أبى عمر و المعدل ببخاري: حدثني أبو بكر عبدالله بن محمد بن خالد القاضي الرازي الحبال قال: حدثني عبدالله بن محمد بن عبيد القرشي المعروف بابن أبى الدنيا: نا محمد بن سعد الهاشمي صاحب الواقدي: نا أبو الموفق سيف بن جابر قاضي واسط قال: سمعت أبا حنيفة يقول: قدم أنس بن مالك الكوفة و نزل النخع و كان يخضب بالجهر (۱) قدرأيته مرارا
The narrator Abu Bakr ibn Abi Amr in this narration has no known authentication; therefore it is established that this chain is proven neither from Ibn Sa’d nor from Imam Abu Hanifah, so saying “fa-innahu sahha” about it is wrong.
Apart from this, the fabricated narrations proving Imam Abu Hanifah’s tabi’iyyah, found in Akhbar Abi Hanifah of al-Saymari, Jami’ al-Masanid of al-Khwarazmi and many books of manaqib, depend on liars, unknown and discredited narrators such as Ahmad ibn al-Salt al-Hammani and others. For detailed criticism of these narrations, study al-Tankil and al-Lamahat.
The second side’s decisive proof:
The moderate Imam Abu Ahmad ibn Adi al-Jurjani, may Allah have mercy on him (died 365 AH), says:
ثناه عبدالله بن محمد بن عبدالعزيز : حدثني محمود بن غيلان: ثنا المقرئي: سمعت أبا حنيفة يقول: ما رأيت أفضل من عطاء و عامة ما أحدثكم خطاء
“Abu Hanifah said: I have not seen anyone more virtuous than Ata (ibn Abi Rabah, a tabi’i), and most of what I narrate to you is erroneous.”
The chain of this narration is sahih.
Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Abdul Aziz al-Baghawi is thiqah without qualification (Siyar A’lam al-Nubala 14/455). The majority of muhaddithun have declared him thiqah. (al-Asanid al-Sahihah p. 124). The criticism of him by al-Sulaymani and Ibn Adi is rejected. Mahmud ibn Ghaylan is thiqah (Taqrib al-Tahdhib: 2516). Abu Abdur Rahman Abdullah ibn Yazid al-Muqri is thiqah and virtuous.
Khatib al-Baghdadi also narrated this report from Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Baghawi.
In a second narration, Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-Baghawi says:
حدثنا ابن المقرئي: نا أبى قال: سمعت أبا حنيفة يقول: مارأيت أفضل من عطاء و عامة ما (أ) حدثكم به خطأ
The chain of this narration is also sahih.
Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Yazid al-Muqri is thiqah.
Abdullah ibn Yazid al-Muqri is thiqah and virtuous, as has just passed. Abu Yahya Abdul Hamid ibn Abdur Rahman al-Hamani says:
سمعت أبا حنيفة يقول: ما رأيت أحدا أكذب من جابر الجعفي ولا أفضل من عطاء بن أبى رباح
“I heard Abu Hanifah say: I have not seen anyone more lying than Jabir al-Ju’fi, and I have not seen anyone more virtuous than Ata ibn Abi Rabah.”
Abu Yahya al-Hamani is saduq in hadith.
The rest of the chain is completely sahih.
From these sahih chains it is known that Imam Abu Hanifah, may Allah have mercy on him, did not see Sayyidina Anas ibn Malik, may Allah be pleased with him (a Companion of the Messenger), at all; otherwise he would never have said: “I have not seen anyone more virtuous than Ata (a tabi’i).”
Even common people know that every Companion is more virtuous than every tabi’i. When the Imam himself declared that he had not seen anyone more virtuous than Ata the tabi’i, it is established that he did not see any Companion. For details, read the book al-Lamahat by the researcher of Ahl al-Hadith, Maulana Muhammad Rais Nadwi, may Allah preserve him.
Summary of the research: Imam Abu Hanifah is not a tabi’i; his meeting with any single Companion is not established. In this matter, the views of Khatib al-Baghdadi and others are marjuh and wrong, and the opinion and research of the Imam of the names of narrators, Abu al-Hasan al-Daraqutni, is alone correct and sound.
Muhammad ibn Abdur Rahman al-Sakhawi (died 902 AH) writes: وقسم معتدل کأحمد والدار قطنی و ابن عدي “And a group of the muhaddithun is moderate, like Ahmad, al-Daraqutni and Ibn Adi,” meaning these three were moderate.
Hafiz al-Dhahabi says: وقسم كالبخاري و أحمد و أبى زرعة و ابن عدي معتدلون منصفون
And a group of muhaddithun, such as al-Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Abu Zur’ah (al-Razi) and Ibn Adi, were moderate and fair.
Note: Hafiz al-Dhahabi in his book al-Muqizah has at times described Imam al-Daraqutni as lenient (mutasahil).
This statement is rejected, since it stands against the tawthiq and praise of Khatib al-Baghdadi, Abdul Ghani al-Azdi, Qadi Abu al-Tayyib al-Tabari and others. The lenience of al-Daraqutni, al-Ijli, Ibn Khuzaymah and Ibn al-Jarud is not established.
