A Vindication of Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhu and Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah

Introduction by Muftῑ Ebrahim Desai Ṣāḥib (Hafiẓahullah)

The accepted (Maqbūl) ‘Ulamā of the Ummah are like the water of the ocean. It continues to flow. Those who are rejected are like the foam of the sea. It comes to a point and evaporates.

The likes of Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Al Ṣiddῑque Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhu and Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥmatullahi ‘Alayh, who are the focus of the discussion in the issue in reference are like the water of the ocean. The Ummah continues benefitting from their sacrifices and profound knowledge in spite of the undue attacks on their personalities.

Almighty Allah has taken the responsibility to protect the dignity of these personalities who have dedicates their lives to protect the Deen of Allah, through sincere and honest personalities of the Ummah.

The honour and correct philosophy of Maqbūl ‘Ulamā are preserved by Allah through unknown sincere and honest servants of Islām. Maulānā Mu’ādh Chati, second year Iftā student, has adequately defended the honour of Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Al Ṣiddῑque Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhu and presented the correct interpretation of Īmān (faith) according to Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥmatullahi ‘Alayh.

This article makes an interesting read for ‘Ulamā. May Allah accept Maulānā Mu’ādh from those whose knowledge flows like the water of the ocean. Ameen.

Answer:

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

As-salāmu ‘alaykum wa-rahmatullāhi wa-barakātuh.

The statement in reference is found in Tārῑkh Madῑnah Al Salām, better known as Tārῑkh Baghdād, written by Al Khaṭῑb Al Baghdādῑ Raḥimahullah (d.463 AH).

Al Khaṭῑb Al Baghdādῑ Raḥimahullah (d.463 AH) writes:

أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو الْقَاسِمِ عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللهِ السِّرَاجِ بِنَيْسَابُوْرَ قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا أَبُو الْحَسَنِ أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْدُوْسِ الطَّرَائِفِيِّ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا عُثْمَانُ بْنُ سَعِيْدِ الدَّارِمِيِّ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا مَحْبُوْبُ بْنُ مُوْسَى الْأَنْطَاكِيُّ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ الْفَزَارِيَّ يَقُوْلُ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا حَنِيْفَةَ يَقُوْلُ إِيْمَانُ أَبِيْ بَكْرِ الصِّدِّيْقِ وَإِيْمَانُ إِبْلِيْسَ وَاحِدٌ قَالَ إِبْلِيْسُ يَا رَبِّ وَقَالَ أَبُوْ بَكْرٍ الصِّدِّيْقُ يَا رَبِّ 

“Abul Qāsim ‘Abdur Raḥmān ibn Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdillah Al Sirāj informed us in Naysāpūr and said Abul Ḥasan Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn ‘Abdūs Al Ṭarāifῑ informed us and said ‘Uthmān ibn Sa’ῑd Al Dārimῑ narrated to us and said Maḥbūb ibn Mūsā Al Anṭākῑ narrated to us and said: “I heard Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ say, “I heard Abū Ḥanῑfah say: “the Īmān (faith) of [Ḥaḍrat] Abū Bakr Al Ṣiddῑq [Raḍiyallahu ‘Anhu] and the Īmān (faith) of Iblῑs was one, Iblῑs said “oh my Lord” and [Ḥaḍrat] Abū Bakr Al Ṣiddῑq [Raḍiyallahu ‘Anhu] said, “oh my lord”.”””[1]

The same narration with almost identical narrators has also been narrated by Ibn Al Jawzῑ Raḥimahullah (d.597 AH) in his Al Muntaẓam Fῑ Tārῑkh Al Mulūk Wal Umam.[2]

Response to the individuals who use this supposed statement to detract the status of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)

We shall begin by discussing two individuals that are found in the chain of the narration mentioned above:

1)    Maḥbūb ibn Mūsā Al Anṭākῑ

2)    Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ

Maḥbūb ibn Mūsā Al Anṭākῑ 

While Maḥbūb ibn Mūsā Al Anṭākῑ has been considered an acceptable narrator by Ibn Ḥibbān Raḥimahullah (d.354 AH), Al ‘Ijlῑ Raḥimahullah (d.261 AH) and others. Some scholars have criticised his recollection.

Imām Abū Dāwūd Raḥimahullah (d.275 AH) said:

ثِقَةٌ لَا يُلْتَفَتُ إِلَى حِكَايَاتِهِ إِلَّا مِنْ كِتَابٍ

Translation:

“He was a reliable narrator, [but] one should not pay attention to his narrations except those that he narrates from a book”[3]

‘Allāmah Al Daruquṭnῑ Raḥimahullah (d.385 AH) said:

صُوَيْلِحٌ وَلَيْسَ بِالْقَوِيِّ 

Translation:

“He was pious, [but] not a strong narrator”[4]

Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ

Indeed, the scholarly status of Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) cannot be questioned. He was considered very highly by many reputable scholars such as ‘Abdur Raḥmān Al Awzā’ῑ’ Raḥimahullah (d.157 AH), ‘Abdur Raḥmān ibn Mahdῑ Raḥimahullah (d.198 AH), Sufyān ibn ‘Uyaynah Raḥimahullah (d.198 AH), Imām Al Shafi’ῑ’ Raḥimahullah (d.204 AH), Yaḥyā ibn Mu’ῑn Raḥimahullah (d.233 AH), Abū Ḥātim Al Rāzῑ Raḥimahullah (d.277 AH), and others.[5]

Nonetheless, some scholars did criticise his recollection.[6]

Ibn Sa’d Raḥimahullah (d.230 AH) states in his Al Ṭabqāt Al Kubrā:

كَانَ ثِقَةً فَاضِلًا صَاحِبَ سُنَّةٍ وَغَزْوٍ كَثِيْرُ الْخَطَأِ فِيْ حَدِيْثِهِ

Translation:

“He was accomplished and reliable, a person (follower) of the Sunnah and noble war, [but] he made many mistakes in his narrations”[7]

Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) was a contemporary of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH). He was born in Kufā, but later moved to Damascus. He did however return to Kufā during the caliphate of Hārūn Al Rashῑd, who held him in high regard.[8] It is known that Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) resided in Kufā.

Upon analysing the narrations of Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH), it seems that he held a vendetta against Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH). This hypothesis that Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) had an acrimonious relationship with Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) is supported by a narration found in the book Al Jarḥ Wal Ta’dῑl by Ibn Abῑ Ḥātim Al Rāzῑ Raḥimahullah (d.327 AH).

Ibn Abῑ Ḥātim Al Rāzῑ Raḥimahullah (d.327 AH) states:

أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ أَحْمَدَ بْنِ أَبِيْ عَوْنٍ النَّسَائِيِّ أَخْبَرَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ حَكِيْمٍ أَبُوْ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الْمَرْوَزِيُّ أَخْبَرَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ أَخْبَرَنَا الْأَصْمَعِيُّ عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ بْنُ قُرَيْبٍ قَالَ كُنْتُ عِنْدَ هَارُوْنَ أَمِيْرِ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ وَأَبُوْ يُوْسُفَ بِجَنْبِهِ إِذْ دَخَلَ عَلَيْهِ أَبُوْ إِسْحَاقَ الْفَزَارِيُّ فَأُقِيْمَ مِنْ بَعِيْدٍ قَالَ فَنَظَرَ إِلَيْهِ هَارُوْنُ فَقَالَ إِنَّا لِلهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَاجِعُوْنَ وَقَعَ الشَّيْخُ مَوْقَعَ سُوْءٍ قَالَ وَإِذَا الرَّجُلُ عَزِيْمٌ صَرِيْمٌ قَالَ فَقَالَ لَهُ هَارُوْنُ أَنْتَ الَّذِيْ تَحْرُمُ لُبْسَ السَّوَادِ؟ قَالَ فَقَالَ مَعَاذَ اللهِ يَا أَمِيْرَ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ أَنَا مِنْ أَهْلِ بَيْتِ سُنَّةٍ وَجَمَاعَةٍ وَلَقَدْ خَرَجْتُ مَرَّةً فِيْ بَعْضِ هَذِهِ الثُّغُوْرِ وَخَرَجَ أَخِيْ مَعَ إِبْرَاهِيْمَ إِلَى الْبَصْرَةِ فَقَالَ لِيْ أُسْتَاذُ هَذَا “لَمَخْرَجُ أَخِيْكَ مَعَ إِبْرَاهِيْمَ أَحَبُّ إِلَيَّ مِنْ مَخْرَجِكَ” وَهُوَ يَرَى السَّيْفَ فِيْكُمْ فَلَعَلَّ هَذَا الْجَالِسَ بِجَنْبِكَ أَخْبَرَكَ بِهَذَا عَلَى هَذَا وَعَلَى أُسْتَاذِهِ لَعْنَةُ اللهِ وَغَضَبِهِ قَالَ فَمَا زَالَ هَارُوْنُ يَقُوْلُ لَهُ ادْنُ حَتَّى أَقْعَدَهُ فَوْقَ أَبِيْ يُوْسُفَ وَأَبُوْ يُوْسُفَ مُنْكِسٌ رَأْسَهُ قَالَ فَقَالَ يَا أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ قَدْ أَمَرْنَا لَكَ بِثَلَاثَةِ آلَافِ دِيْنَارٍ وَبَغْلٍ وَفَرَسٍ قَالَ يَا أَمِيْرَ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ نَحْنُ أَهْلُ بَيْتٍ وَفِيْ سِعَةٍ أَنَا لَرُجُلٌ مِّنْ وُلْدِ أَسْمَاءَ بْنِ خَارِجَةَ الْفَزَارِيِّ قَالَ يَا أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ خُذْهُمَا إِنْ كُنْتَ مُحْتَاجًا إِلَيْهِمَا وَإِلَّا فَادْفَعْهُمَا فِيْ أَهْلِ الْحَاجَةِ

Translation:

“Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn Abῑ Awn Al Nasa’ῑ’ informed us [and said] Aḥmad ibn Ḥakῑm ‘Abdur Raḥmān Al Marwazῑ informed us [and said] Aḥmad ibn Sulaymān informed us [and said] Al Asma’ῑ’ ‘Abdul Malik ibn Quraib informed [us and said],

“I was by Hārūn [Al Rashῑd], the leader of the believers, and [Imām] Abū Yūsuf was sitting next to him, when suddenly, Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ walked in. Abū Isḥāq was made to stand far away [from us]. When Hārūn [Al Rashῑd] saw him, he said, “To Allah we belong and to Him we shall return! The Shaykh has taken an unpleasant stance.” [Al Asma’ῑ’ states] I saw a built man of a tall stature. Hārūn inquired “are you the one who prohibits one from wearing black clothes?” [Al Asma’ῑ’ states] he (Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ) replied, “I seek protection in Allah! Oh leader of the believers! I come from a household of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah. Indeed, I once entered some of these villages and my brother had joined Ibrāhῑm [Al Hāshimῑ – who led a rebellion against the Abbasid caliph, Al Manṣūr], so the teacher (Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)) of this one (Imām Abū Yūsuf Raḥimahullah (d.182 AH)) said to me, “that your brother has joined Ibrahim is more preferable to me than if you were to join [Ibrāhῑm]” and he (Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)) saw [the permissibility] of [using] the sword [against you], so it is possible that this one (Imām Abū Yūsuf Raḥimahullah (d.182 AH)) who sits next to you informed you of this [that I prohibit the wearing of black clothes], May the wrath of Allah and His anger be upon this one (Imām Abū Yūsuf Raḥimahullah (d.182 AH)) and his teacher (Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH))”. Hārūn then called him (Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ) close and made him sit [in a position] higher than Abū Yūsuf while Abū Yūsuf looked down. [Al Asma’ῑ’ states] he (Hārūn) then said, “Oh Abū Isḥāq, I have ordered 3000 dinars for you, a mule, and a horse”. He (Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ) replied, “oh leader of the believers! We are a wealthy family, I am from the children of Asmā ibn Khārijah”. He (Hārūn) replied, “Oh Abū Isḥāq! Take it if you need it, otherwise, give it to someone who needs it”.”[9]

This narration has also been narrated through a different chain of narration by Ibn ‘Asākir Al Dimishqῑ Raḥimahullah (d.571 AH) in his Tārῑkh Dimishq, Ḥāfiẓ Al Dhahabῑ Raḥimahullah (d.748 AH) in his Tārῑkh Al Islām[10], and Al Khatῑb Al Baghdādῑ Raḥimahullah (d.463 AH) in his Tārῑkh Baghdād[11].

These narrations uncover a possible basis for Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH)’s disdain for Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH). In the year 145 AH, Ibrāhῑm ibn ‘Abdillah ibn Ḥasan Al Hāshimῑ (d.145 AH) led a rebellion against Al Manṣūr, the Abbasid caliph at the time.[12] Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH)’s brother inquired from Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) whether he should join the rebellion or not. Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) advised him that he should join the rebellion.

However, it so happened that the rebellion was put down, and Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH)’s brother was killed by the army of Al Manṣūr. When Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) returned to Kufa to distribute his brother’s estate, he inquired from Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) whether or not he had advised his brother to join the rebellion of Ibrāhῑm ibn ‘Abdillah ibn Ḥasan Al Hāshimῑ, Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) replied in the affirmative. Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) then asked Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) regarding his current place of residence, when Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) replied that he is residing in a village in Shām, Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) replied, “Your brother went to a better place than you”.[13]

This may have been the cause of a decline in the relationship between Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) and Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH).

It is a common principle amongst the scholars of analytical criticism and approval (Al Jarḥ Wal Ta’dῑl) that the analytical criticism made by a scholar of his rival contemporary is not accepted.

Ḥāfiẓ Al Dhahabῑ Raḥimahullah (d.748 AH) states in Mῑzān Al I’tidāl:

قُلْتُ كَلَامُ الْأَقْرَانِ بَعْضِهِمْ فِيْ بَعْضٍ لَا يُعْبَأُ بِهِ لَا سَيِّمًا إِذَا لَاحَ لَكَ أَنَّهُ لِعَدَاوَةٍ أَوْ لِمَذْهَبٍ أَوْ لِحَسَدٍ وَمَا يَنْجُوْ مِنْهُ إِلَّا مَنْ عَصَمَهُ اللهُ وَمَا عَلِمْتُ أَنَّ عَصْرًا مِّنَ الْأَعْصَارِ سَلِمَ أَهْلُهُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ سِوَى الْأَنْبِيَاءِ وَالصِّدِّيْقِيْنَ وَلَوْ شِئْتُ لَسَرَدْتُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ كَرَارِيْسَ

Translation:

“I say, “The [critical] assessments by contemporaries, of one another, should not be given credence especially when it seems to you that it (the critical assessment) is out of enmity or jealousy. None have been saved from this except those whom Allah has saved, and I do not know of an age from the ages in which its people (scholars) were safe from this except the Prophets and their companions. If I wanted, I could write [many] pages on this [issue]”[14]

Ḥāfiẓ Shams Al Dῑn Al Sakhāwῑ Raḥimahullah (d.902 AH) states in Fatḥ Al Mugῑth:

قَدْ عَقَدَ ابْنُ عَبْدِ الْبَرِّ فِيْ “جَامِعِهِ” بَابًا لِكَلَامِ الْأَقْرَانِ الْمُتَعَاصِرِيْنَ بَعْضِهِمْ فِيْ بَعْضٍ وَرَأَى أَنَّ أَهْلَ الْعِلْمِ لَا يُقْبَلُ الْجَرْحُ فِيْهِمْ إِلَّا بِبَيَانٍ وَاضِحٍ فَإِنِ انْضَمَّ لِذَلِكَ عَدَاوَةٌ فَهُوَ أَوْلَى بِعَدْمِ الْقُبُوْلِ

Translation:

“Indeed, Ibn ‘Abd Al Bar [Al Mālikῑ (d.463 AH)] has dedicated a chapter in his ‘Jāmi’ (Jāmi’u Bayān Al ‘Ilm Wa Faḍlih) on the [critical] assessment of the contemporaries of a single age; each of them [critically assessing] the other. He (Ibn ‘Abd Al Bar Raḥimahullah (d.463 AH)) views that the scholars do not accept criticism between them [of one another] except if it is clearly explained. Thus, if enmity [between the contemporaries] is conjoined to this [criticism], then it is all the more likely to be an unacceptable [criticism].”[15]

‘Allāmah Tāj Al Dῑn Al Subkῑ Raḥimahullah states in Ṭabqāt Al Shafi’i’yyah Al Kubrā:

يَنْبَغِيْ لَكَ أَيُّهَا الْمُسْتَرْشِدُ أَنْ تَسْلُكَ سَبِيْلَ الْأَدَبِ مَعَ الْأَئِمَّةِ الْمَاضِيْنَ وَأَنْ لَا تَنْظُرَ إِلَى كَلَامِ بَعْضِهِمْ فِيْ بَعْضٍ إِلَّا إِذَا أَتَى بِبُرْهَانٍ وَاضِحٍ ثُمَّ إِنْ قَدَرْتَ عَلَى التَّأْوِيْلِ وَتَحْسِيْنِ الظَّنِّ فَدُوْنَكَ وَإِلَّا فَاضْرِبْ صَفْحًا عَمَّا جَرَى بَيْنَهُمْ فَإِنَّكَ لَنْ تُخْلَقَ لِهَذَا فَاشْتَغِلْ بِمَا يَعْنِيْكَ وَدَعْ مَا لَا يَعْنِيْكَ وَلَا يَزَالُ طَالِبُ الْعِلْمِ نَبِيْلًا حَتَّى يَخُوْضَ فِيْمَا جَرَى بَيْنَ الْمَاضِيْنَ

Translation:

“It is appropriate for you, oh seeker of guidance, to tread the path of respect with the scholars of the past, and [it is for you] to not look at their statements (criticism) towards one another, except if it (the criticism) is mentioned with a clear explanation. Then, if [you find a dubious statement and] you are able to interpret it [in a positive manner] and [you are able to] keep a positive thought, then you should do. Otherwise (if you are unable to do the above), close the page which discusses what transpired between them, for you have not been created for this (i.e. to delve into their personal disputes), so involve yourself in that which concerns you and leave that which does not concern you. A seeker of knowledge will remain grand until he delves into that (i.e. disputes) which occurred between the people (scholars) of the past”[16]

Thus, considering that Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) was a luminary scholar, and therefore could not have blatantly lied, he may have paraphrased Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)’s views and not recorded an actual statement of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH).

‘Allāmah Ṭāhir Al Jazāirῑ Raḥimahullah writes in Tawjῑh Al Naẓr Ilā Uṣūl Al Athar:

وَاعْلَم أَن الرِّوَايَة بِالْمَعْنَى قَدْ أَحَسَّ بِضَرَرِهَا كَثِيْرٌ مِّنَ الْعُلَمَاءِ وَشَكَوْا مِنْهَا عَلَى اخْتِلَافِ عُلُوْمِهِمِ غَيْرَ أَنَّ مُعْظَمَ ضَرَرِهَا كَانَ فِي الحَدِيْثِ وَالْفِقْهِ لِعِظَمِ أَمْرِهِمَا وَقَدْ نُسِبَ لِكَثِيْرٍ مِّنَ الْعُلَمَاءِ الْأَعْلَامِ أَقْوَالٌ بَعِيْدَةٌ عَنِ السَّدَادِ جِدًّا اتَّخَذَهَا كَثِيْرٌ مِّنْ خُصُوْمِهِمِ ذَرِيعَةً لِلطَّعْنِ فِيْهِمْ وَالْاِزْدِرَاءِ بِهِمْ ثُمَّ تَبَيَّنَ بَعْدَ الْبَحْثِ الشَّدِيْدِ وَالتَّتَبُّعِ أَنَّهُمْ لَمْ يَقُوْلُوْا بِهَا وَإِنَّمَا نَشَأَتْ نِسْبَتُهَا إِلَيْهِم مِنْ أَقْوَالٍ رَوَاهَا الرَّاوِي عَنْهُم بِالْمَعْنَى فَقَصَرَ فِي التَّعْبِيرِ عَمَّا قَالُوْهُ فَكَانَ مِنْ ذَلِك مَا كَانَ فَيَنْبَغِي لِكُلِّ ذِيْ نَبَاهَةٍ أَنْ لَا يُبَادِرَ بِالْإِعْتِرَاضِ عَلَى الْمَشْهُوْرِيْنَ بِالْفَضْلِ وَالنَّبْلِ بِمُجَرَّد أَن يَّبْلُغَهُ قَوْلٌ يَنْبُو السَّمْعُ عَنْهُ عَنْ أَحَدٍ مِّنْهُمْ وَلِيَتَثَبَّتْ فِيْ ذَلِكَ وَإِلَّا كَانَ جَدِيْرًا بِالْمَلَامِ

Translation:

“Know that the harms of paraphrased narrations have been experiences by many scholars, and they complained of it in respect to their different fields of knowledge, except that the majority of its harm was in [the field of] Ḥadῑth and Fiqh due to the magnitude of their content. Indeed, many statements that were far from being accurate were attributed to many great scholars, which many of their detractors took as an opportunity to insult them and attack them. Then, after an intense research and investigation, it becomes apparent that they did not say it (the statement) and, rather, the cause of its attribution towards them is due to the paraphrased narration of a narrator who narrated from them and was unable to accurately mention what they had [actually] said. This has caused whatever it has caused.

Therefore, it is appropriate for every intellectual person to avoid hastily criticising those who were well-known for their grace and nobility simply based upon a statement of theirs that has reached him through someone who heard from them. One should be wary of this, otherwise he shall be worthy of rebuke”[17]

If per-chance the statement was uttered by Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH), then it is important for one to understand Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)’s position on the intricacies of Īmān (faith) in order to make sense of the supposed statement.

Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)’s position on the intricacies of Īmān (faith)

A deviant sect known as the Al Murjiah held the view that as long as a believer admits that he has Īmān (faith), he is not required to perform actions, i.e. endeavour to perform good deeds and refrain from committing evil deeds. This sect believed that performing evil deeds and not performing good deeds does not harm a believer in any way whatsoever.[18]

It was the view of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) that the actions of a believer and the Īmān (faith) of a believer are two separate aspects. Thus, the actions of a believer do not increase or decrease his Īmān (faith) as the two are separate aspects. According to Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH), actions do not fall under the definition of Īmān (faith):

الإِيْمَانُ إِقْرَارٌ بِاللِّسَانِ وَتَصْدِيْقٌ بِالْجَنَانِ

Translation:

“Īmān (faith) is to admit with the tongue and believe with the heart”[19]

This stance of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) made some scholars assume that Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) was a member of the deviant sect Al Murjiah – who considered a believer’s actions to be inconsequential.

Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) also felt that Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) was part of the deviant sect Al Murjiah. Thus, Al Khaṭῑb Al Baghdādῑ (d.463 AH) records that after mentioning the supposed-statement of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) (quoted at the beginning of this article), Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) quipped:

وَمَنْ كَانَ مِنَ الْمُرْجِئَةِ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَقُلْ هَذَا أُنْكِرَ عَلَيْهِ قَوْلُهُ

“Whoever is from amongst the Al Murjiah and does not say this (i.e. the supposed statement of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah quoted at the beginning of this article), then his denial shall be rejected”

However, this was not case; Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) was not from the deviant sect Al Murjiah.[20] Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)’s stance was that although there is a difference between one’s Īmān (faith) and one’s actions, one is required to perform actions, i.e. perform good deeds and leave out evil deeds, however, excellence or negligence in actions will not increase or decrease his Īmān (faith) as the two are separate aspects.[21] This means that a person who carries out evil deeds is deserved of punishment in the Hereafter, however, his evil deeds will not take away his Īmān (faith).

Indeed, Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)’s position with regards to Īmān (faith) is one which endeavours to maintain the Īmān (faith) of all believers by making a distinction between Īmān (faith) and actions, this position maintains the Īmān (faith) of non-practising or sinful Muslims. It in no way propagates that actions are unimportant or that non-practising and sinful Muslims are not worthy of punishment.

This is understood from Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)’s statement in his book, Al Fiqh Al Akbar. Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) states:

وَلَا نقُوْلُ إِنَّ الْمُؤْمِنَ لَا تَضُرُّهُ الذُّنُوْبَ وَلَا نَقُوُلُ إِنَّهُ لَا يَدْخُلُ النَّارَ وَلَا نَقُوْلُ إِنَّهُ يَخْلُدُ فِيْهَا وَإِنْ كَانَ فَاسِقًا بَعْدَ أَن يَّخْرُجَ مِنَ الدُّنْيَا مُؤْمِنًا

Translation:

 “We do not claim that a believer is unharmed by sin or that he will not enter hellfire. Nor do we claim that he will remain in hell forever, even if he is unrighteous, after leaving the world a believer.”[22]

‘Allāmah ‘Abdul Ḥayy Al Lucknawῑ Raḥimahullah (d.1304 AH):

قَدْ يَظُنُّ مَنْ لَا عِلْمَ لَهُ – حِيْنَ يَرَى فِيْ “مِيْزَانِ الْإِعْتِدَالِ” وَ”تَهْذِيْبِ الْكَمَالِ” وَ”تَهْذِيْبِ التَّهْذِيْبِ” وَ”تَقْرِيْبِ التَّهْذِيْبِ” وَغَيْرِهَا مِنْ كُتُبِ الْفَنِّ فِيْ حَقِّ كَثِيْرٍ مِّنَ الرُّوَاةِ: الطَّعْنُ بِالْإِرْجَاءِ عَنْ أَئِمَّةِ النَّقْدِ الْأَثْبَاتِ حَيْثُ يَقُوْلُوْنَ رُمِيَ بِالْإِرْجَاءِ أَوْ كَانَ مُرْجِئًا أَوْ نَحْوَ ذَلِكَ مِنْ عِبَارَاتِهِمْ – كَوْنُهُمْ خَارِجِيْنَ مِنْ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ وَالْجَمَاعَةِ دَاخِلِيْنَ فِيْ فِرَقِ الضَّلَالَةِ مَجْروْحِيْنَ بِالْبِدْعَةِ الْإِعْتِقَادِيَّةِ مَعْدُوْدِيْنَ مِنَ الْفِرَقِ الْمُرْجِئَةِ الضَّالَّةِ وَمِنْ هَاهُنَا طَعَنَ كَثِيْرٌ مِّنْهُمْ عَلَى الْإِمَامِ أَبِيْ حَنِيْفَةَ وَصَاحِبَيْهِ وَشُيُوْخِهِ لِوُجُوْدِ إِطْلَاقِ الْإِرْجَاءِ عَلَيْهِمْ فِيْ كُتُبِ مَن يُعْتَمَدُ عَلَى نَقْلِهِمْ وَمَنْشَأُ ظَنِّهِمْ غَفْلَتُهُمْ عَنْ أَحَدِ قِسْمَيِ الْإِرْجَاءِ وَسُرْعَةِ انْتِقَالِ ذَهْنِهِمْ إِلَى الْإِرْجَاءِ الَّذِيْ هُوَ ضَلَالٌ عِنْدَ الْعُلَمَاءِ

Translation:

“At times, one with no knowledge thinks, when he looks into Mῑzān Al I’tidāl and Tahdhῑb Al Kamāl and Tahdhῑb Al Tahdhῑb and Taqrῑb Al Tahdhῑb and other books of this field, with regards to many narrators that were accused of being an Al Murjiah by many reliable and expert scholars, where they have said “he was accused of being Al Murjiah” or “he was an Al Murjiah” or similar statements of theirs – that they (these narrators) were out of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah and part of a deviant sect who have been criticised for their innovative beliefs and who are considered a part of the deviant Al Murjiah sect. It is based upon this [thought] that many of them attacked Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah, his two companions, and his teachers! [Simply because] they found the general [word] Al Murjiah [being used] for them in many books which are relied upon in their quotations. The basis of this thought is their ignorance of the two types of ‘Al Murjiah’ and the haste of their thoughts in turning towards the Al Murjiah that were a deviant sect according to the scholars.”[23]

The claims accusing Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) of being a member of the Al Murjiah sect hold no weight when one considers an explicit statement from Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) himself. In a letter that he wrote to ‘Uthmān Al Battῑ, Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) elaborates upon his position with regards to Īmān (faith).

The erudite scholar, and author of Al Nihāyah, which is a commentary written upon the critically acclaimed book in Ḥanafῑ jurisprudence, Al Hidāyah, Ḥusām Al Dῑn Ḥusain Al Saghnāqῑ narrates from Ḥāfiẓ Al Dῑn Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn Naṣr Al Bukhārῑ who narrates from Shamsul A’immah Muḥammad ibn ‘Abd Al Sattār Al Kardarῑ (d.642 AH) who narrates from Burhān Al Dῑn Abil Ḥasan ‘Alῑ ibn Abῑ Bakr ibn ‘Abdil Jalῑl Al Murghῑnānῑ (d.593 AH) – the author of Al Hidāyah – who narrates from Ḍiyā Al Dῑn Muḥammad ibn Al Ḥusayn ibn Nāṣir Al Yarsūkhῑ who narrates from ‘Alā Al Dῑn Abῑ Bakr Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad Al Samarqandῑ who narrates from Abul Mu’ῑn Maymūn ibn Muḥammad Al Makḥūlῑ Al Nasafῑ who narrates from Abū Zakariyyā Yaḥyā ibn Mutarrif Al Balkhῑ who narrates from Abū Sālif Muḥammad ibn Al Ḥusayn Al Samarqandῑ who narrates from Abū Sa’ῑd Muḥammad ibn Abῑ Bakr Al Bustῑ who narrates from Abul Ḥasan ‘Alῑ ibn Aḥmad Al Farisῑ who narrates from Naṣῑr ibn Yaḥyā Al Faqῑh who narrates from Abū ‘Abdillah Muḥammad ibn Samā’ah Al Tamῑmῑ who narrates from Imām Abū Yūsuf (d.182 AH) who narrates from Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) that he wrote the following letter:

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمَنِ الرَّحِيْمِ

مِنْ أَبِيْ حَنِيْفَةَ إِلَى عُثْمَانَ الْبِتِّيْ: سَلَامٌ عَلَيْكَ, فَإِنِّيْ أَحْمَدُ إِلَيْكَ اللهَ الَّذِيْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ. أَمَّا بَعْدُ فَإِنِّيْ أُوْصِيْكَ بِتَقْوَى اللهِ وَطَاعَتِهِ وَكَفَى بِاللِه حَسِيْبًا وَجَازِيًا. بَلَغَنِيْ كِتَابُكَ وَفَهِمْتُ الَّذِيْ فِيْهِ مِنْ نَصِيْحَتِكَ وَقَدَ كُتِبَ أَنَّهَ دَعَاكَ إِلَى الْكِتَابِ بِمَا كَتَبْتَ حِرْصُكَ عَلَى الْخَيْرِ وَالنَّصِيْحَةِ وَعَلَى ذَلِكَ كَانَ مَوْضَعَهُ عِنْدَنَا كَتَبْتَ تَذْكُرُ أَنَّهُ بَلَغَكَ أَنِّيْ مِنَ الْمُرْجِئَةِ وَأَنِّيْ أَقُوْلُ مُؤْمِنٌ ضَالٌّ … فَافْهَمْ كِتَابِيْ إِلَيْكَ فَاحْذَرْ رَأْيَكَ عَلَى نَفْسِكَ وَتَخَوَّفْ أَن يَدخُلَ الشَّيْطَانُ عَلَيْكَ عَصَمَنَا اللهُ وَإِيَّاَك بِطَاعَتِهِ وَنَسْأَلُهُ التَّوْفِيْقَ لَنَا وَلَكَ بِرَحْمَتِهِ ثُمَّ أُخْبِرُكَ أَنَّ النَّاسَ كَانُوْا أَهْلَ شِرْكٍ قَبْلَ أَن يَبْعَثَ اللهُ تَعَالَى مُحَمَّدًا صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فَبَعَثَ مُحَمَّدًا يَدْعُوْهُمْ إِلَى الْإِسْلَامِ فَدَعَاهُمْ إِلَى أَن يَّشْهَدُوْا أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللهُ وَحْدَهُ لَا شَرِيْكَ لَهُ وَالْإِقْرَارُ بِمَا جَاءَ بِهِ مِنَ اللهِ تَعَالَى وَكَانَ الدَّاخِلُ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ مُؤْمِنًا بَرِيْئًا مِّنَ الشِّرْكِ حَرَامًا مَالُهُ وَدَمُهُ لَهُ حَقُّ الْمُسْلِمِيْنَ وَحُرْمَتُهُمْ وَكَانَ التَّارِكُ لِذَلِكَ حِيْنَ دَعَا إِلَيْهِ كَافِرًا بَرِيْئًا مِّنَ الْإِيْمَانِ حَلَالًا مَالُهُ وَدَمُهُ لَا يُقْبَلُ مِنْهُ إِلَّا الدُّخُوْلُ فِي الْإِسْلَامِ أَوِ الْقَتْلُ إِلَّا مَا ذَكَرَ اللهُ سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى فِيْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ مِنْ إِعْطَاءِ الْجِزْيَةِ ثُمَّ نَزَلَتِ الْفَرَائِضُ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ عَلَى أَهْلِ التَّصْدِيْقِ. فَكَانَ الْأَخْذُ بِهَا عَمَلًا مَعَ الْإيْمَانِ وَلِذَلِكَ يَقُوْلُ اللهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ “الَّذِيْنَ آمَنُوْا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ” وَقَالَ “وَمَن يُّؤْمِنْ بِاللهِ وَيَعْمَلْ صَالِحًا” وَأَشْبَاهُ ذَلِكَ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ فَلَمْ يَكُنِ الْمُضَيِّعْ لِلْعَمَلِ مُضَيِّعًا لِلتَّصْدِيْقِ وَقَدْ أَصَابَ التَّصْدِيْقَ بِغَيْرِ عَمَلٍ وَلَوْ كَانَ الْمُضَيِّعُ لِلْعَمَلِ مُضَيِّعًا لِلتَّصْدِيْقِ لَانْتَقَلَ مِنْ اسْمِ الْإِيْمَانِ وَحُرْمَتِهِ بِتَضْيِيْعِهِ الْعَمَلَ كَمَا أَنَّ النَّاسَ لَوْ ضَيَّعُوْا التَّصْدِيْقَ لَانْتَقَلُوْا بِتَضْيِيْعِهِ مِنْ اسْمِ الْإِيْمَانِ وَحُرْمَتِهِ وَحَقِّهِ وَرَجَعُوْا إِلَى حَالِهِم الَّتِيْ كَانُوْا عَلَيْهَا مِنَ الشِّرْكِ…. وَاعْلَمْ أَنِّيْ أَقُوْلُ أَهْلُ الْقِبْلَةِ مُؤْمِنُوْنَ لَسْتُ أُخْرِجُهُمْ مِنَ الْإِيْمَانِ بِتَضْيِيْعِ شَيْءٍ مِّنَ الْفَرَائِضِ فَمَنْ أَطَاعَ اللهَ تَعَالَى فِي الْفَرَائِضِ كُلِّهَا مَعَ الْإِيْمَانِ كَانَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْجَنَّةِ عِنْدَنَا وَمَنْ تَرَكَ الْإِيْمَانَ وَالْعَمَلَ كَانَ كَافِرًا مِّنْ أَهْلِ النَّارِ وَمَنْ أَصَابَ الْإِيْمَانَ وَضَيَّعَ شَيْئًا مِّنَ الْفَرَائِضِ كَانَ مُؤْمِنًا مُذْنِبًا وَكَانَ اللهُ تَعَالَى فِيْهِ الْمَشِيْئَةُ إِنْ شَاءَ عَذَّبَهُ وَإِنْ شَاءَ غَفَرَ لَهُ … زَعَمَ أَخُوْكَ عَطَاءُ بْنُ أَبِيْ رَبَاحٍ … وَزَعَمَ أَخُوْكَ نَافِعٌ هَذَا وَأَنَّهُ فَارَقَ (ابْنَ عُمَرَ) عَلَى هَذَا وَزَعَمَ سَالِمٌ عَنْ سَعِيْدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ هَذَا أَمْرُ أَصْحَابِ مُحَمَّدٍ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَزَعَمَ أَخُوْكَ نَافِعٌ أَنَّ هَذَا أَمْرُ عَبْدِ اللهِ بْنِ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُمَا وَزَعَمَ ذَلِكَ أَيْضًا عَبْدُ الْكَرِيْمِ عَنْ طَاوُسٍ عَنِ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ رَضِيَ اللهُ عَنْهُمَا أَنَّ هَذَا أَمْرُهُ وَقَدْ بَلَغَنِيْ عَنْ عَلِيِّ بْنِ أَبِيْ طَالِبٍ رَضِيَ اللهُ تَعَالَى عَنْهُ حِيْنَ كَتَبَ الْقَضِيَّةَ أَنَّهُ يُسَمِّى الطَّائِفَتَيْنَ مُؤْمِنَيْنِ جَمِيْعًا … وَسَلَامُ اللهِ عَلَيْكَ وَرَحْمَةُ اللهِ وَبَرَكَاتُهُ وَالْحَمْدُ لِلهِ رَبِّ الْعَالِمِيْنَ وَصَلَّى اللهُ عَلَى سَيِّدِنَا مُحَمَّدٍ وَّعَلَى آلِهِ وَصَحْبِهِ أَجْمَعِيْنَ

Translation:

“In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful,

From Abū Ḥanῑfah to ‘Uthmān Al Battῑ,

Peace unto you,

I begin by praising Allah the one whom there is no one worthy of worship besides Him.

Thereafter, I advise you to fear Allah and obey Him, and Allah is a sufficient reckoner and remunerator. You letter has reached me and I have understood what was in it from your advice. You wrote in it that what drove you to write the letter was your desire to [spread] goodness and [give] advice; and this is indeed the perception we have of your letter. You mentioned that it has reached you that I am from amongst the Al Murjiah, and that I say (hold the view that) “A believer [can be] misguided”, and [you mentioned] that this is difficult for you [to comprehend]…so understand my letter to you, and fear your views upon yourself, and be wary of the devil attacking you, may Allah save us and yourself through our obedience [to him], and I ask Him (Allah) for inspiration and mercy for us and yourself.

After this, I inform you that the people were polytheists before Allah the Almighty sent [Prophet] Muḥammad Ṣallallāhu ‘Alayhi Wasallam. He sent Muḥammad to invite them towards Islām and to testify that there is no one worthy of worship besides Him, there is no partner for Him. And [he invited them] to believe that which he (Prophet Muḥammad Ṣallallāhu ‘Alayhi Wasallam) had bought to them from Allah the Almighty. Whosoever [accepted the invitation and] entered Islam was to be considered a believer and [was be considered] free from polytheism; his wealth and life would be sacred, and he would hold the rights of the Muslims and their sanctity. Whosoever denied this [invitation] when he was called towards it was to be [considered] a disbeliever who was free from Īmān (faith), whose wealth and life would not be sacred, nothing would be accepted from him except that he enter Islam or be killed, except the people of the book regarding whom Allah, the Glorified, the Exalted, had revealed that they should give a jizya (tax).

After this [acceptance of the invitation from the believers], the commands were revealed. Thus to act upon these commands was to perform actions along with Īmān (faith). This is why Allah, The Glorified, The Exalted, says, “Those who bought Īmān (faith) and performed good actions”.

And He says, “Those who bring Iman (faith) and perform good actions”. And other similar verses from the Qur’an.

Thus, one who was negligent in actions was not considered negligent in Īmān (faith), rather one would be considered an individual with Īmān (faith), but no actions. If negligence in actions were to be considered [equivalent to] negligence in Īmān (faith), then [by being negligent in actions] one would no longer be considered a Mu’min (believer) and would lose his sanctity [as a believer] due to his negligence in actions – just as one who is negligent in Īmān (faith) would no longer be considered a Mu’min (believer), and would lose his sanctity and his rights, and would return to the state of disbelief…Know that I say that the believers are believers, I do not take away their Īmān (faith) if they are negligent in fulfilling the commands of Allah.

Thus, the one who obeys Allah the Almighty in all of His commands along with Iman (faith) will be considered [a righteous believer and] an occupant of paradise. The one who does not have Iman (faith) and has violated the commands of Allah is a disbeliever and shall be an occupant of hellfire. The one who has Īmān (faith) but has violated some of the commands of Allah is a sinful believer, it is up to the will of Allah; If He wishes, He may punish him and if He wishes, He may forgive him…This is the view of your brother ‘Aṭā ibn Abῑ Rabāḥ… your brother Nāfi’, who states that he found Ibn ‘Umar to have this view, and Sālim narrates it as the view of Sa’ῑd ibn Jubayr. Also, your brother ‘Abdul Karῑm narrates it from Ṭāwūs who narrates it as the view of Ibn ‘Abbās, May Allah be pleased with him. Indeed, it has reached me that when Ali ibn Abῑ Ṭālib, May Allah be pleased with him, wrote the treaty [during the battle of the camel], he labelled both groups as ‘believers’ [even though the greatest violation of the commands of Allah is to kill another believer]….May the peace, mercy, and blessings of Allah be upon you. All praise is to Allah, the Lord of the universe, and may Allah send salutations upon our master, Muḥammad, and his family, and all his companions”[24]

Note: It is also important to note that although the essence of Īmān (faith) does not increase or decrease through actions as the two are separate aspects[25], it is unanimously accepted that Īmān (faith) can increase in terms of its effects (Thamarāt/Kayfiyyāt) and in terms of conviction (Yaqῑn).[26] Thus, the essence of Īmān (faith) in the hearts of the Sahabah was the same as the essence of Īmān (faith) in our hearts, however, their conviction (Yaqῑn) in this Īmān (faith) and the effects (Thamarāt/Kayfiyyāt) of their Īmān (faith) were stronger.[27]

In a dialogue between Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) and his student, Abū Muqātil Al Samarqandῑ, Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) mentions his definition of the metaphorical meaning of Īmān (faith) by stating:

وَذَلِكَ بِأَن يُّقِرَّ بِأَنَّ اللهَ رَبُّهُ وَيَصْدُقَ بِأَنَّ اللهَ رَبُّهُ وَيَتَيَقَّنَ بِأَنَّ اللهَ رَبُّهُ وَيَعْرِفَ بِأَنَّ اللهَ رَبُّهُ

“It (Īmān (faith)) is for one to declare that Allah is his Lord, and to ratify that Allah is his Lord, and to believe with certainty that Allah is his Lord and to recognise that Allah is his Lord”[28]

Thus, the metaphorical meaning of Īmān (faith) is to recognise (المعرفة) and admit that Allah is the Lord.

From a Sharῑ’ah perspective, recognition (المعرفة) of Allah is not sufficient for the Shar’ῑ’ meaning of Īmān (faith).[29] Rather, one is also required to perform:

الإِذْعَانُ وَالْقُبُوْلُ

“Submission and acceptance”[30]

Accordingly, Iblῑs has not fulfilled the Shar’ῑ’ meaning of Īmān (faith) – as although he has recognised (المعرفة) and admitted that Allah is his Lord, he has not accepted or submitted (الإذعان والقبول) Allah to be his Lord. Therefore, he does not have Īmān (faith) from a Sharῑ’ah perspective.

After one has correctly understood Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)’s stance on the intricacies of Īmān (faith) – that actions are different from Īmān (faith) and that the metaphorical definition of Īmān (faith) is to recognise (المعرفة) and admit that Allah is the Lord, one may fathom the intended meaning of the supposed statement of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH);  that it is possible he may have referred to the similarity between the two personalities (Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhu and Iblῑs) in terms of the metaphorical definition of Īmān (faith) – i.e. recognition (المعرفة).

At this point, we wish to clarify another chain of narration found for the statement in question. ‘Abdullah ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, the son of Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, states in his book, Kitāb Al Sunnah:

حَدَّثَنِيْ إِبْرَاهِيْمُ بْنُ سَعِيْدٍ نَا أَبُوْ تَوْبَةَ عَنْ أَبِيْ إِسْحَاقَ الْفَزَارِيِّ قَالَ كَانَ أَبُوْ حَنِيْفَةَ يَقُوْلُ إِيْمَانُ إِبْلِيْسَ وَإِيْمَانُ أَبِيْ بَكْرٍ الصِّدِّيْقِ رَضِيَ الله ُعَنْهُ وَاحِدٌ قَالَ أَبُوْ بَكْرٍ يَا رَبِّ وَقَالَ إِبْلِيْسُ يَا رَبِّ

“Ibrāhῑm ibn Sa’ῑd narrated to us [and said] Abū Tawbah reported to us from Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ that he said, “Abū Ḥanῑfah would say, “the Īmān (faith) of Iblis and the Īmān (faith) of Abū Bakr Al Şiddῑq Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhu was one. Abū Bakr said “oh my Lord!” and Iblῑs said, “oh my Lord!”””[31]

However, upon analysing this book, we discover that there are many discrepancies with the book, including the following:

• Ø The researcher (Muḥaqqiq) of the book, Muḥammad ibn Sa’ῑd ibn Sālim Al Qaḥṭānῑ, states in his research that there are six manuscripts of this book:

1 – The manuscript of Maktabah Al Ẓahῑriyyah

2 – The manuscript of Shaykh ‘Abdullah ibn Ḥasan Al Shaykh

3 – The manuscripts of Al Maktabah Al ‘Āmmah

4 – The manuscript of Darul Kutub Al Miṣriyyah

5 – The manuscript of Al Maktabah Al Taymūriyyah

6 – The manuscript of Khudā Baksh Hind

The narrations containing ad hominem defamations against Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) are only found in the manuscript of Maktabah Al Ẓahῑriyyah.[32] The remaining five manuscripts do not contain the narration which defame Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH).

Another researcher, Aḥmad ibn Sa’d ibn Ḥamdan Al Ghāmidῑ, states:

قُلْتُ إِنَّ الَّذِيْ يَبْدُوْ أَنَّهُ هُوَ الصَّحِيْحُ أَنَّ هَذِهِ الْآثَارَ الْمَذْكُوْرَةَ فِيْ أَبِيْ حَنِيْفَةَ – رَحِمَهُ اللهُ – دَخِيْلَةٌ عَلَى كِتَابِ السُّنَّةِ وَأَنَّ عَدْمِ وُجُوْدِهَا فِيْ خَمْسِ نُسَخٍ لَيُؤَكِّدُ أَنَّهَا لَيْسَتْ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَاحْتِمَالُ اسْقَاطِهَا فِي الْخَمْسِ النُّسَخِ مِنْ شَخْصٍ وَاحِدٍ غَيْرُ وَارِدٍ وَإِنَّمَا الْإِحْتِمَالُ الْوَارِدِ أَنَّ النُّسْخَةَ الْمُنْفَرِدَةَ بِهَا هِيَ الَّتِيْ تَعَرَّضَتْ لِلزِّيَادَةِ

Translation:

“I say: what seems correct to me is that these statements with regards to [Imām] Abū Ḥanῑfah – Raḥimahullah – have been added to the book Al Sunnah, and the fact that they are not found in five manuscripts strengthens the fact that they are not a part of the book. The possibility of one person removing them from five manuscripts is not viable, rather the more probable answer is that the is that the lone manuscript with these statements is the one that has had additions made to it”[33]

• Ø The narration mentioned earlier which indicated that Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) had animosity towards Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) is found in this book too. Thus, ‘Abdullah ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal states:

حَدَّثَنِيْ مَنْصُوْرُ بْنُ أَبِيْ مُزَاحِمٍ نَا يَزِيْدُ بْنُ يُوْسُفَ عَنْ أَبِيْ إِسْحَاقَ الْفَزَارِيِّ قَالَ لَمَّا قُتِلَ أَخِيْ جِئْتُ الْكُوْفَةَ فَسَأَلْتُ عَنْ أَخِيْ فَقَالُوْا اسْتَفْتَى أَبَا حَنِيْفَةَ فِي الْخُرُوْجِ مَعَ إِبْرَاهِيْمَ فَأَفْتَاهُ فَقُلْتُ لَهُ تُفْتِيْ أَخِيْ بِالْخُرُوْجِ مَعَهُ – يَعْنِيْ إِبْرَاهِيْمَ؟ فَقَالَ نَعَمْ وَهُوَ خَيْرٌ مِّنْكَ

Translation:

“Manṣūr ibn Abῑ Muzāḥim narrated to us [and said] Yazῑd ibn Yūsuf reported to us from Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ who said, “when my brother was killed, I came to Kufā and asked regarding my brother, so they (the people of kufa) said to men “he asked Abū Ḥanῑfah whether he should go out [and join the rebellion] with Ibrahim, so he (Abū Ḥanῑfah) gave him a Fatwā stating that he should”. So I [went to Abū Ḥanῑfah and] said to him “you gave my brother a Fatwā to leave [and join the rebellion] with him (Ibrahim)?” He (Abū Ḥanῑfah) said, “yes, and he was better than you”””[34]

In fact, another narration is found in the book which further supports the hypothesis that Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) held an animosity towards Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH). ‘Abdullah ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal states:

حَدَّثَنِيْ مُحَمَّدٌ نَا أَبُوْ صَالِحٍ قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ الْفَزَارِيَّ يَقُوْلُ قَالَ أَبُوْ حَنِيْفَةَ يَا أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ أَيْنَ تَسْكُنُ الْيَوْمَ؟ فَقُلْتُ لَهُ بِالْمَصِيْصَةِ قَالَ لَوْ ذَهَبْتَ حَيْثُ ذَهَبَ أَخُوْكَ كَانَ خَيْرًا لَكَ وَكَانَ أَخُوْ أَبِيْ إِسْحَاقَ خَرَجَ مَعَ الْمُبَيَّضَةِ فَقَتَلَهُ الْمُسَوَّدَةُ

Translation:

“Muḥmmad narrated to me [and said] Abū Ṣāliḥ narrated to us [and] said, “I heard Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ say, “Abū Ḥanῑfah said, “oh Abū Isḥāq! Where do you live these days?” So I said to him “In Maṣῑṣah [a village in Shām]”. He (Abū Ḥanῑfah) said, “if you had gone where your brother went, it would have been better for you””. Abū Isḥāq’s brother had went out [and rebelled] with the white army [Ibrāhῑm Al Hashimῑ’s army] and was killed by the black army [Al Manṣūr’s army].”[35]

• Ø There are serious errors in this book too, such as the attribution of a body to Allah the Almighty.[36]

A similar narration is also found in Sharḥ Uṣūl I’tiqād Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah Minal Kitāb Wal Sunnah Wa Ijmā’ Al Ṣaḥābah Wal Tabi’ῑn Min Ba’ḍihim by Hibatullah Al Ṭabarῑ Al Lālkāi (d.418 AH), who states:

أَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عِيْسَى قَالَ أَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ قَالَ أَنَا نَصْرُ بْنُ عَمَّارٍ التَّنِيْسِي ُّقَالَ نَا أَبُوْ صَالِحٍ الْفَرَّاءُ مَحْبُوْبُ بْنُ مُوْسَى قَالَ سَمِعْتُ أَبَا إِسْحَاقَ الْفَزَارِيَّ قَالَ قَالَ أَبُوْ حَنِيْفَةَ “إِيْمَانُ أَبِيْ بَكْرٍ وَإِيْمَانُ إِبْلِيْسَ وَاحِدٌ قَالَ أَبُوْ بَكْرٍ يَا رَبِّ وَقَالَ إِبْلِيْسَ يَا رَبِّ”

Translation:

“‘Alῑ ibn Muḥammad ibn Īsā reported to us [and] said ‘Alῑ ibn Muḥammad reported to us [and] said Naṣr ibn ‘Ammār Al Tanῑsῑ reported to us [and] said Abū Şāliḥ Al Farrā Maḥbūb ibn Mūsā narrated to us [and] said, “I heard Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ say, “Abū Ḥanῑfah said, “the Īmān (faith) of Abū Bakr and the Īmān (faith) of Iblῑs was one, Abū Bakr said, “oh my Lord!”, and Iblῑs said, “oh my Lord!”””””[37]

However, this narration is also the statement of Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH), whose animosity for Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) has been elaborated above.

Indeed, it is well known that the book, Al ‘Aqῑdah Al Ṭaḥāwiyyah, written by Imām Al Taḥāwῑ (d.132 AH), is an accepted and prized book of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah. The scholars of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah unanimously agree that it contains the beliefs of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah. The actual name of this book is:

بَيَانُ اعْتِقَادِ أَهْلِ السُّنَّةِ وَالْجَمَاعَةِ عَلَى مَذْهَبِ فُقَهَاءِ الْمِلَّةِ أَبِيْ حَنِيْفَةَ وَأَبِيْ يُوْسُفَ وَمُحَمَّدِ بْنِ الْحَسَنِ

Translation:

“An elaboration of the beliefs of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah based upon the views of the jurists of [our] religion, [Imām] Abū Ḥanῑfah, [Imām] Abū Yūsuf, and [Imām] Muḥammad ibn Al Ḥasan”[38]

Accordingly, to claim that the ‘Aqῑdah (belief) of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) was contrary to the ‘Aqāid (beliefs) of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah is indeed a defamation of the Ahl Al Sunnah Wal Jamā’ah.

To conclude, we present a snippet of the statements made by the scholars of the past in praise of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH):

Ibn ‘Abdil Bar (d.463 AH) has narrated from Isḥāq ibn Muḥammad Al Ḥalabῑ, who said, Sulaymān ibn Saif narrated to us, who said, ‘Abdul Şāmit ibn ‘Abd Al Wārith, who said, “we were by Shu’bah ibn Al Ḥajjāj when it was said to him, “Abū Ḥanῑfah has passed away”, Shu’bah said “Indeed the jurisprudence of Kufā has gone with him, may Allah bless us and him with His mercy””.[39]

Ibn ‘Abdil Bar (d.463 AH) has narrated from Aḥmad ibn Al Ḥasan Al Ḥafῑẓ, who said, ‘Abdullah ibn Aḥmad ibn Ibrāhῑm Al Dawraqῑ, who said, “I was listening when Yaḥyā ibn Mu’ῑn was asked about Abū Ḥanῑfah, he said “he is reliable, I have not heard of anyone who has considered him weak, we have Shu’bah who wrote to him and commanded him that he should narrate [Aḥadῑth], and Shu’bah is Shu’bah”.[40]

Abū ‘Abdillah Al Ṣaymarῑ (d.436 AH) states that ‘Abdullah ibn Muḥammad Al Ḥalwānῑ informed me [and] said Al Qādῑ Abū Bakr Mukarram ibn Aḥmad narrated to us [and] said ‘Abdul Wahhāb ibn Muḥammad narrated to us [and] said Muḥammad ibn Sa’dān narrated to me [and] said, “I heard Abū Sulaymān Al Jawzjānῑ [who] said, “I heard Ḥammād ibn Zayd say, “I had decided to go for Ḥajj and so I visited Ayyūb [Al Sakhtiyānῑ] to bid him farewell, he said [to me] “it has reached me that the pious man, the jurist of Kufa, Abū Ḥanῑfah is [also] performing Hajj, if you meet him, convey my salams to him.”””[41]

Ḥāfiẓ Al Dhahabῑ has quoted the statement of ‘Abdullah ibn Al Mubārak Raḥimahullah, in which ‘Abdullah ibn Al Mubārak said, “if Allah had not assisted me with Abū Ḥanῑfah and Sufyān, then I would have been similar to the laymen”.[42]

Ibn ‘Abdil Bar (d.463 AH) narrates from Ḥakam who said Yūsuf reported to us [and said] Muḥammad ibn Ḥafs ibn ‘Amruyah reported to us, whilst performing Ḥajj, and said: I heard ‘Abbās ibn ‘Azῑz, who said: I heard Ḥarmalah say, “I heard Al Shafi’ῑ’ say, “whoever wishes to study the field of Al Maghāzῑ (the events of the noble wars of the Prophet), then he is of the family of Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq, and whoever wishes to study the field of Fiqh, then he is of the family of Abū Ḥanῑfah””[43]

Ḥāfiẓ Al Dhahabῑ Raḥimahullah (d.748 AH) said, “mastery in jurisprudence and its intricacies are handed over to this master, and in this is a matter in which there is no doubt…and his biography is such that it could be separately written in two volumes. May Allah be pleased with him and may He have mercy upon him”.[44]

Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathῑr Raḥimahullah (d.774 AH) said, “he (Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH)) was the jurist of ‘Irāq, one of the Imāms of Islām, a master luminary, one of cornerstones of the scholars, from amongst the four Imam of the four prestigious Madhabs, and he was the earliest one of the four to pass away as he lived during the time of the Sahabah, and he saw Anas ibn Mālik [Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhū], it has been said that he saw others, and some have mentioned that he has narrated from seven Ṣaḥābah. And Allah knows best”.[45]

It is impossible for these great masters of Sharῑ’ah, whose authentic statements we have recorded, to have praised Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) had he made the comments that his detractors accuse him to have made – and that too using weak narrations.

Response to the Shῑ’as who use this supposed statement to detract the status of Ḥadrat Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhu

If, perchance, the statement of Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) is established, then he certainly did not intend to diminish or detract the status of Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhū.

This is evident from the fact that in another narration found in Tārῑkh Baghdād, Al Khaṭῑb Al Baghdādῑ Raḥimahullah (d.463 AH) states:

أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ الْفَضْلِ قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا َعَبْدُ اللهِ بْنُ جَعْفَرٍ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا يَعْقُوْبُ ابْنُ سُفْيَانَ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُوْ بَكْرٍ الْحُمَيْدِيُّ عَنْ أَبِيْ صَالِحٍ الْفَرَّاءِ عَنِ الْفَزَارِيِّ قَالَ قَالَ أَبُوْ حَنِيْفَةَ إِيْمَانُ آدَمَ وَإِيْمَانُ إِبْلِيْسَ وَاحِدٌ قَالَ إِبْلِيْسُ “رَبِّ بِمَا أَغْوَيْتَنِيْ” وَقَالَ “رَبِّ فَأَنْظِرْنِيْ إِلَى يَوْمِ يُبْعَثُوْنَ” وَقَالَ آدَمُ “رَبَّنَا ظَلَمْنَا أَنْفُسَنَا”

Translation:

“Ibn Al Faḍl informed us [and] said ‘Abdullah ibn Ja’far informed us [and] said Ya’qūb ibn Sufyān narrated to us [and] said Abū Bakr Al Ḥumaydῑ narrated to us from Abu Salih [who narrated] from Al Fazārῑ that he said, “Abū Ḥanῑfah said, “the Īmān (faith) of Ādam and the Imān (faith) of Iblῑs is one, Iblῑs said “oh my Lord! Due to you misguiding me…” and he (Iblῑs) said “oh my Lord! Grant me respite till the day of reckoning” and Ādam [‘Alayhis Salām] said “oh our Lord! We have oppressed ourselves…””””[46]

(Note: like the narration mentioned earlier, this narration also contains the narrator Abū Isḥāq Al Fazārῑ Raḥimahullah (d. ca.886 AH) Thus, it is extremely unlikely that Imām Abū Ḥanῑfah Raḥimahullah (d.150 AH) uttered such a statement for the reasons we have elaborated above.)

The status of Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhū as the greatest companion of the Prophet Şallallāhu ‘Alayhi Wasallam[47] can never be diminished by the statement of any human being.

Indeed, to insult Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhū[48] or to deny the companionship[49] or caliphate[50] of Ḥaḍrat Abū Bakr Raḍiyallāhu ‘Anhū is an act of disbelief (kufr).

And Allah Ta’āla Knows Best

Mu’ādh Chati

Student Darul Iftaa
Blackburn, England, UK

Checked and Approved by,
Mufti Ebrahim Desai.