Salafi Research Institute SRI
Compiled, Translated and Annotated
Abu Khuzaimah Ansari
The dar ut tahqiq website have published a few articles on the proficiency of Imām Abū Ḥanīfah in Ḥadīth, sure they have the prerogative as they are his ardent, muʿtassub and bigoted blind followers. This is a brief response to it.
As the readers knows, we are currently publishing Shaikh Irshad ul-Ḥaqq al-Athari’s book ‘Asbāb Ikhtilāf al-Fuqahā’ which is an answer to Shaikh Muḥammad Awwamahs ‘Athar al-Ḥadīth Sharīf.’ Whilst translating this many years ago, at the time I added some detailed notes to the proceeding narration which is what you will be reading insha’Allāh.
Therefore, this narration will be uploaded again without the notes in the series of the book.
Shaikh Irshād ul-Ḥaqq al-Atharī said,
Imām Abū Ḥanīfah’s own statement has been transmitted from him by his student, Imām Abū ʿAbdur Rahmān ʿAbdullāh bin Yazīd Muqrī who said,
“I heard Abū Ḥanīfah say the Ahadīth he generally narrates are incorrect.” [Tārīkh Baghdād [13:402][1], [al-Kāmil [7:2473][2]
The chain of this statement from the Imām is authentic.
Footnotes
[Khaṭīb Baghdādī transmitted this statement with the following chain, “I was informed by Ibn al-Faḍal who was informed by Daʿlaj bin Aḥmad who was informed by Aḥmad bin ʿAlī al-Ābār and it was narrated to them by Maḥmūd bin Ghīlān and Ibn Muqrī narrated to them saying he heard Abū Ḥanīfah say….”
All the narrators are trustworthy and upright.
Ibn al-Muqrī is Muḥammad bin ʿAbdullāh bin Yazīd. Hafiẓ Khalīlī said, “Trustworthy with agreement.” [Tahdhīb [9:284], Taqrīb [pg.456][3]
Maḥmūd bin Ghīlān is also trustworthy and a preserver, he is also a narrator of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim [Tahdhīb [10:64], [Sīyar ʿAlām an-Nabulā [12:223][4], [Tadhkirah ul-Ḥuffāz [2:475][5]
Aḥmad bin ʿAlī al-Ābār is also a trustworthy Imām and a preserver ie Ḥāfiẓ. [Tārīkh Baghdād [4:306], Sīyar [13:443] [Tadhkirah ul-Ḥuffāz [2:639][6]
Dʿalaj bin Aḥmad is a well known trustworthy scholar of Ḥadīth and a jurist. Imām Ḥākim said he was an Imām of the Ahlul Ḥadīth of his time. [Sīyar [16:30][7], Tārīkh Baghdād [8:387][8], Tadhkirah ul-Ḥuffāẓ [3:881][9]
Ibn al-Faḍal is Muḥammad bin al-Ḥussain bin Muḥammad bin al-Faḍal al-Baghdādī al-Qaṭṭān. He is a well known teacher of Imām Baihaqī and Imām Khaṭīb Baghdādī. Imām Dhahabī said that he was trustworthy with agreement. [Siyār [17:331],[10] Tārīkh Baghdād [2:246][11] others.
Thus, the narrators of this chain are all trustworthy; however, Ibn al-Muqrī hearing from Imām Abū Ḥanīfah is debatable. Imām Ibn ʿAdiyy has transmitted the same statement from ʿAbdullāh bin ʿAbdul ʿAzīz via the chain of Maḥmūd bin Ghīlān from al-Muqrī. In fact Imām Tirmidhī has also transmitted it from Maḥmūd bin Ghīlān and said he heard it from al-Muqrī [al-ʿEllal al-Kabīr [2:966].
What this means is that Maḥmūd bin Ghīlān did not narrate from Ibn al-Muqrī but rather from his father whose name is ʿAbdullāh bin Yazīd al-Muqrī. As for ʿAbdullāh bin Yazīd he is the famous Muhaddith, Imām Bukhārī’s teacher as well as a trustworthy Imām. [Tahdhīb [6:83][12], Sīyar [10:166][13]
Imām Ibn ʿAdiyy also transmitted the same statement via Aḥmad bin Muḥammad bin Saʿīd from Muḥammad bin ʿAbdullāh bin Suleimān from Salamah bin Shabīb from al-Muqrī-and this chain is also Ḥasan. Salamah bin Shabīb al-Nīsābūrī is trustworthy [Tahdhīb [4:146][14] and others. Also note Al-Kāmil mentions Maslamatah which is incorrect and needs to be corrected.
Muḥammad bin ʿAbdullāh bin Suleimān is the famous trustworthy scholar of Ḥadīth from Kūfa. [Sīyar [14:41] and others. Aḥmad bin Muḥammad bin Saʿīd is Ibn ʿUqadah who is a famous Hāfiẓ of Ḥadīth however, some have spoken against him whereas others declared him to be trustworthy. [Sīyar [15:340], Tārīkh Baghdād [5:14], Līsān [1:263][15] and others.
However he is not alone in this narration, nonetheless this narration is authentically established from Imām al-Muqrī and Allah knows best.)
Addtional notes
[1] Khaṭīb Baghdādī, 1st Edn. 1417H, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyyah, Beirūt, Lebanon, ed. Mustafa ʿAbdul Qādir ʿEtā
[2] Ibn ʿAdiyy, al-Kāmil Fī Ḍuʿafā ar-Rijāl [8:237 under no.1954], Edn. 1st, 1418H/1997c, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyyah, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) ʿĀdil Aḥmad ʿAbdul Mawjūd, ʿAli Muḥammad Maʿuḍ and ʿAbdul Fattāh Abū Sinnah.
[3] Ibn Abī Ḥātim said, trustworthy ie Thiqah and Truthful, and I asked my father (ie Abū Ḥātim) and he said trustworthy. [Kitāb al-Jarḥ wat-Taʿdīl [7:307-308no.1668] Edn. 1st, 1372H/1952, Daʿirah al-Maʿrif al-Uthmānīyyah, Hyderabād, India]. Nasāʿī said trustworthy. Ibn Ḥibban cited an entry for him in his at-Thiqāt. Ibn Ḥajr adds, Muslimah bin Qāsim declared him trustworthy. [Tahdhīb ut-Tahdhīb [9:245 no.6334], Edn.1st 1415H/1994c, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyyah, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) Mustafa ʿAbdul Qādir ʿEtā]. Ibn Ḥajr said trustworthy in Taqrīb as his final grading. Imāms Nasāʿī and Ibn Mājah transmitted from him. [Taqrīb at-Tahdhīb [pp.425 no.6054]. Edn. 1st, 1420H/1999c, Mu’assasah ar-Risālah. Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) ʿĀdil Murshid.] See also al-Kamāl [25:570 no.5480], al-Kāshif [no.5054].
[4] Dhahabī praised him with the titles of al-Imām, al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Ḥujjah, (The Imam, memoriser and evidence in of himself) and further cites the statement of Imāms Aḥmad and Nasāʿī, see Sīyar ʿAlām an-Nabulā [12:223 no.77], Edn. 3rd, 1405H/1985c, Mu’assasah ar-Risālah, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) Shuʿayb al-Arna’ūt , Edition, 1st, 1427H/2006c, Dār al-Ḥadīth, Cairo, Egypt. [9:556 no.2040]
[5] Ibn Ḥajr said Aḥmad said he was knowledgeable in hadith and a person of Sunnah. Nasāʿī said trustworthy. [Tārīkh Baghdād [13:89-90] and Ṭabaqāt al-Ḥanābillah [1:340]. Ibn Ḥibbān cited him in at-Thiqāt [9:202]. Ibn Ḥajr adds, Muslimah (bin Qāsim) declared him to be trustworthy. [Tahdhīb ut-Tahdhīb [10:58 no.6821]. Ibn Ḥajr said trustworthy and Imāms Bukhārī, Muslim, Tirmidhī, Nasāʿī, Ibn Mājah transmitted Ḥadīth from him. [Taqrīb at-Tahdhīb [pg.455 no.6516]. [Kitāb Tadhkirah ul-Ḥuffāz [2:47 no.488] of Dhahabī, Edn. 1st, 1419H/1998c, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyyah, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) Zakarīyyah ʿUmaīrāt. See also Tahdhīb al-Kamāl [2:1310], Khulāṣah Tahdhīb al-Kamāl [3:14], Tārīkh Baghdād [13:89], Ṭabaqāt al-Hanābillah [1:340], Tadhhīb at-Tahdhīb [4:27], al-ʿIbar [1:431], Shadhrāt adh-Dhahab [2:92], Tārīkh al-Kābir [7:404 no.1769] Edn. 1st, 1407H/1986c, Dār al-Fikr, Beirūt, Lebanon, ed.?] and Tārīkh Ṣaghīr [8:233] Edn. 4th, 1402H/1982c, Idārah Tarjamān as-Sunnah, Lahore, Pakistān, (ed.) Imām Shams ul-Haq Azīmabādī and Shaikh Muḥammad Muḥiuddīn Ilabādī] both of Bukhārī without mentioning praise or criticism except that he heard hadith from Wakīʿ. Abū Ḥātim said he was trustworthy as transmitted by Ibn Abī Ḥātim [al-Jarḥ Wa Taʿdīl [8:291 no.1340].
[6] Dhahabī cites Khaṭīb as saying Thiqah (trustworthy), Ḥāfiẓ (preserver), Mutaqin (firm) and of good madhab. [Kitāb Tadhkirah ul-Ḥuffāz [2:157 no.662], Ṭabaqāt al-Hanābillah [1:52] of Qaḍi Abū Yaʿla and Sūyuṭī’s Ṭabaqāt al-Ḥuffāẓ [no.208].
[7] Saʿīd ibn Yūnus said he was trustworthy. [Sīyar [16:31-32].
[8] Khaṭīb Baghdadī, Tārīkh Baghdād [8:383-387 no.4495], Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyyah, Edition [9:366 no.4448], Edn.1st, 1422H/2002, Dār al-Gharb al-Islāmī, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) Dr. Bashār ʿAwād Maʿrūf.
[9] Dhahabī said he was a treasure of knowledge and an ocean of narrations. Kitāb Tadhkirrah ul-Ḥuffāz [3:65-66 no.850], Dāraquṭnī declared him trustworthy and safe. [Suwalāt as-Sulamī Lid-Dāraquṭnī [1:166 no.131] Edn. 1st, 1427H/2006c, KSA, (ed.), Saʿd bin ʿAbdullāh al-Humaid and Dr. Khālid bin ʿAbdur Rahman al-Jarjīsī]. Dāraquṭnī said he was the most firm and established from his teachers [Siyar [16:32], [Tadhkirrah [3:66]. Also refer to al-ʿIbar [2:291], Ṭabaqāt al-Huffāẓ [pp. 361 no.819], Shadhrāt adh-Dhahab [3:8],
[10] Dhahabi adds, ash-Shaikh, ʿAlim, Thiqah, al-Musnad. Baihaqī, al-Lālikaʿī and Khaṭīb narrate from him [Sīyar [17:331-332 no.202].
[11] Tārīkh Baghdād [2:246 no.718] See also Shadhrāt adh-Dhahab [3:203]. al-ʿIbar [3:120]
[12] Tahdhīb at-Tahdhīb [6:86 no.3839]
[13] Dhahabi praises him with the following titles, al-Imām, al-ʿAlim, al-Ḥāfiẓ, al-Muḥaddith, al-Ḥujjah and Shaikh of the Ḥaram. Nasāʿī said he was Thiqah, and he was from the major scholars of Bukhārī. Ibn Mubārak said he was pure gold. Abū Ḥātim said he was truthful. Khalīlī said he narrates his ḥadīth from trustworthy narrators are evidence and unique and his son, Muḥammad is trustworthy. [Sīyar [10:166-169 no.29], Kitāb Tadhkirrah al-Ḥuffāz [1:269 no.361], al-Jarḥ [5:210 no.939]. Ibn Ḥibbān cites him in at-Thiqāt [8:432]. Bukhārī has entries for him in his Tārīkh al-Kabīr [5:228] and Tārīkh as-Ṣaghīr [2:326]. Ibn Ḥajr said learned, trustworthy and from the major teachers of Bukhari. [Taqrīb at-Tahdhīb [pp.272 no.3715], see also al-Kāshif [2:144 no.3100], al-ʿAqd al-Thamīn [5:299], Wafī al-Wafyāt [17:678], Ṭabaqāt ibn Saʿd [5:367], Tārīkh Ibn Maʿīn [no.338], Tārīkh Khalīfah [no.474], Ṭabaqāt Khalīfah [no.227], Tadhhīb at-Tahdhīb [2:196], al-ʿIbar [1:364], Ṭabaqāt al-Huffāẓ [pp.160 no.432], Shadhrāt adh-Dhahab [2:29], Tahdhīb al-Kamāl [no.757], Khulaṣah Tahdhīb-Kamāl [2:113],
[14] Tahdhīb at-Tahdhīb [4:132 no.2587]. Ibn Ḥajr mentions, Abū Ḥātim said truthful, Ṣāleh bin Muḥammad al-Baghdadī said truthful. Nasāʿī said we learnt his fine. Aḥmad bin Sīyār said a person of the Sunnah who would travel for Ḥadīth. Abū Nuʿaym al-Aṣbahānī said he was from amongst the trustworthy ones and a group of Imāms narrate from him. Ibn Ḥibbān entered him in his at-Thiqāt. Ḥākim said he was the Muhaddith of Makkah, firm and people agreed on his truthfulness. Ibn Ḥajr said trustworthy in Taqrīb at-Tahdhīb [pp.187 no.2494]. See also al-Kamāl [11:284 no.2455], Tārīkh al-Kabīr [4:85 no.2054] al-Jarḥ [4:164 no.722] and al-Kāshif [no.2054]
[15] Līsān al-Mīzān [1:369 no.826], Edn. 1st, 1416H/1996c, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyyah, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) Dr. ʿAbdul Fattaḥ Abū Sinnah] Indeed the expert scholars differed over him. Dhahabī weakened him in al-Mughnī [1:55] and in his Dīwān al-Ḍuʿafā [1:33 no.87] Edn. 1st, 1408H/1988c, Dār al-Qalam, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) Khalīl Maīs] he says al-Ḥāfiẓ, famous (Mashūr) but weakened and in the Mizān al-ʿEitidāl [1:281 no.547] in his entry he brings a number of statements of criticism and said Muhaddith of Kūfa, an average shīʿa. A number of people weakened him whilst others strengthened him. [Mīzān, Edn. 1st, 1416H/1995c, Dār al-Kutub al-ʿIlmīyyah, Beirūt, Lebanon, (ed.) Dr. ʿAbdul Fattaḥ Abū Sinnah]
