Abu Jafar Al Tahawi- The last Hanafi leader from Egypt.

An Account of the Life of One of the Greatest Traditionist, Jurisprudent and Theologian of the Hanafi School.

Abu Ja‘far Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Salamah Al Azdi, Al Hajri, Al- Tahawi, was born at Taha, a village in upper Egypt. His forefathers came from the Yemen to Egypt and settled there after it had come under the Muslim rule. There is a considerable difference of opinion as to the year of his birth. The years 229/843, 230/844, 238/852 and 239/853 are mentioned by different biographers. Al-Sam‘ani asserts that he was born in 229/843 and this is correct. He died in Egypt in 321/933.¹

Al Tahawi was mainly interested in Hadith and Fiqh, and was regarded as one of the greatest Muhaddithin and fuqaha’ of his time. According to Abu Ishaq al-Shirazi, he was the last leader of Hanafi Fiqh in Egypt.² He began to study Shafi‘i Law under his maternal uncle abu Ibrahim Isma‘il Al-Muzani (d. 264/878), the most celebrated pupil of Imam Al Shafa'i, and then leaving his school he took up the study of Hanafi Law under Al Shaykh Abu Ja‘far Ahmad bin Abi Imran (d. 285/898), who became the Chief Qadi of Egypt in 270/883. Different versions are given by his biographers of his conversion to Hanafi school, but the most probable reason seems to be that the system of Imam Abu Hanifah appealed to his critical insight more than that of Imam Shafa‘i. 

Al Tahawi went to Syria in 268/882 for further studies in Hanafi Law and became a pupil of Qadi Abu Khazim ‘Abd al-Hamid bin Ja‘far, the then Chief Justice of Syria. He learnt hadith from a large number of Shaykh's especially from those who visited Egypt at his time, and had also many pupils of distinction. He is a distinguished author of many important works of which the following may be mentioned here: 

1) Sharah Maa'ni Al Athar. 

2) Mushkil Al Athar.

3) Ahkam Al Qur'an.

4) Ikthilaf Al- Ulama.

5) Al-Nawddir Al-Fiqhiyyah.

6) Kitab Al-Shurut al-Kabir.

7) Al Shurut Al-Ausat.

8) Sharh Al Jami Al Saghir.

9) Sharh Al-Jami Al Kabir.

10) Al Mukhtasar.

11) Manaqib Abu Hanifah.

12) Tarikh Al Kabir.

13) Al Radd Ala Kitab Al Mudallisin.

14) Al Radd Ala Abi Ubayd.

15) Al Radd Ala Isa bin Abban.

16) Hukm Aradi Makkah etc.

His original contribution to Hadith literature, so far as we can estimate, is that he introduced a new system of collecting legal traditions, developed a new method of interpreting and harmonizing the conliicting traditions, and adopted a new criterion for criticizing them. His predecessors and contemporaries, the authors of Al Sihah Al Sittah (the Six Canonical Compilations) collecting traditions according to their own standards and principles, left out a large number of genuine traditions. Al Tahawi made a strenuous effort to collect all the genuine legal traditions of the Prophet, narrated by different authorities on a particular subject, together with the opinions of the Companions of the Prophet, their Successors and the distinguished jurisprudents. He then scrutinized traditions (ahadith) and showed by evidence which of them were authentic, strong, weak, unknown, or such as might be supposed to have been repealed. Thus, his collection provided for the scholars an unprecedented opportunity to judge for themselves the merits or demerits of a particular tradition. The criterion for judging the genuineness of a tradition, according to the Traditionists in general, was the Isnad (chain of the narrators), and so they paid greater attention to the scrutiny of the isnad than to the scrutiny of the text (mam) of a tradition. But Al-Tahawi, while scrutinizing a tradition, took into consideration the main as well as the isnad of the tradition. He also aimed at a harmonizing interpretation in case of conflicting traditions. 

Al Tahawi, like Al Maturidi, was a follower of Imam Abu Hanifah (d. 150/ 767) in jurisprudence as well as in theoloy. He wrote a. little treatise on theology named Bayan al Sunnah wal-Jama‘ah, generally known as 'Aqidat Al Tahawiyyah. In the introduction to this treatise he says he will give therein an account of the beliefs of the Ahl al-sunnah wal jama'ah according to the views of Imam Abu Hanifah, Abu Yusuf, and Muhammad Al- Shaybani the well-known jurisprudents of the community. So the importance of his creed lies in the fact that it corroborates the views of Imam Abu Hanifah, the founder of the school, that have come down to us from different sources. Al-Tahawi made no attempt to explain the views of the Imam or to solve the old theological problems by advancing any new arguments. His sole aim was to give a summary of the views of the Imam and to show indirectly that they were in conformity with the traditional views of the orthodox school. 

Imam Abu Hanifah directed his movement against the Kharijites, Qadarites. Mu‘tazilites, shi‘ites, Jabarites, the extreme Murji’ites, and the Hashwiyyah³, the last being a group of the orthodox people who under the influence of the converted Jews, Christians, and Magians fell into gross anthropomorphism, and ascribed to God all the characteristics of a created being.‘ He was the first theologian among the fuqaha’ who adopted the principles and method of reasoning and applied them to a critical examination of the articles of faith and the laws of the Shari'ah. That is why he and his followers were called by the 'traditionists the People of Reason and Opinion (Ashab Al Ra'i wa-l Qiyas). This rational spirit and philosophical attitude were more consistently maintained by Al-Maturidi than by Al Tahawi. Their views on the nature of faith. attributes of God, beatitic vision, divine decree, and human freedom may be mentioned here to indicate the distinctive features of their methods. 

To All the scholars mentioned in the above article, "May Allah be pleased with you All."

¹Al Sam'ani, Al Ansab, Leiden, 1912, Pg 368, Ibn Al Nadim, Al Fihrist, Cairo, Pg 292, Jalaluddin Suyuti, Husn Al Muhadarah, Vol 1, Pg 147, Ibn Khallikan, Waf'at Al Ayn, Vol 1, Pg 19, Al Dhahabi, Tadkirat Al Huffaz, Vol 3, Pg 28, 1915 ed.

²Al Dhahabi, Tadhkirat Al Huffaz, Vol 3, Pg 28, Jalaluddin Suyuti, Husn Al Muhadarah, Vol 1, Pg 147.

According to M.M Sharif, Abdullah Ibn Saba, a convert from Judaism introduced and propagated Anthropomorphic ideas among the Muslims during the caliphate of Ali. He quoted Al Shahrastani to support his claim.

⇛ The following article is written from the book, "The History of Muslim Philosophy- Vol 2," Pg 268 by M.M. Sharif.

Intellect- A Tool for conceiving The Creator

THE USE OF AQ'L TO CONCEIVE GOD- THE STORY OF HA'YY BIN YAQZAN.

The use of Aq'l in Islam reached its peak with the advent of Muta'zila and their endorsement by many Abbasid kings. Their core doctrine revolved around their understanding that the Aq'l is infallible (but its usage, limit and understanding can differ from person to person). They used to deny the verses of Quran, The Sunnah and the Mutawatir Hadith if they oppose their "Aq'l" and went astray. (The Maturidi creed advocates rejection of an Ahad- Singularly narrated hadith outright if it goes against a verse of the Quran, the established Sunnah and the Aq'l which is acceptable and practiced my many Fuqaha of Ahlus Sunnah).

The Hanafi school of Jurisprudence are close to Muta'zila in the usage of the intellect (although the later was a school of theology) to understand Divine revelation and laws set by the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) Himself. One of the famous example where the limit for using the intellect was given by the founder of the school himself. It was written by Mullah Ali Qari (d.1024) in his Sharah Fiqh Al Akbar that Imam Abu Hanifa said, "Intellect is also a tool to know and believe in Oneness of God". i.e Even if there was no Prophet sent towards a civilization, then too it was necessary for them to have At Tawhid using consciousness, observation, reflection and Intellect as a tool".[1] The Maturidi theologians closely follow Imam Abu Hanifa in this. 

➧Scan from Sharah Fiqh Al Akbar.

This article is written particularly to recount the story of Ha'yy bin Yaqzan which was originally written by a 5th Century AH Philosopher Ibn Tufayl (d.581H) in His Risala Ha'yy bin Yaqzan to construct a template for the people to use intellect as a source of knowledge. 


"It is actually a tale of two islands rather than the story of a child per se. One island is uninhabited, yet on this island a child appears spontaneously. The child is Hayy b. Yaqzan, Living son of the one who is awake.[2] He is suckled by a gazelle, and on the death of his mother is left to his own resources. Hayy grows up without human intervention in complete isolation, His innate intelligence develops gradually. Through seven successive stages, and over a period of seven years, he relives what is essentially the evolution of humankind: he discovers fire, develops tools, domesticates animals, contemplates the stars, and forms a notion of the universe through ceaseless observation (bah'th) and reflection (naz'ar). Then he enters the realm of metaphysics and proves for himself the existence of an all-powerful Creator. Ultimately, without either prophetic aid or revelation, he achieves the utmost fullness of knowledge and contentment in mystical union with God. 

At this stage of his development, while he is as yet unaware of the existence of another island or indeed, of the human race, he is amazed one day to discover, walking on his very own island, a creature shaped like himself. This man is named Absal, and he has just arrived from the neighboring island- an inhabited and civilized place where the king Salaman reigns, and where life is regulated by a system of rewards and punishments dictated by conventional religion. Absal represents the archetype of rationalist thought, and is dedicated to speculative theology- a mutakallim. Salaman is the archetype of a Maliki jurist (faqih). By contrast, Absal is much more anxious to delve into esoteric concerns (bat'in), to discover the mystical dimension of things (al-ma‘ani al-ruha'niya), and to fathom their allegorical interpretation (ta’wil). In short, he is naturally predisposed to constant cogitation (fikr), incessant reflection (ta’ammul ), and the search for the deeper meaning of things. He is prepared to bring the fruits of rational speculation (ma‘qul) to bear on matters already addressed by doctrines handed down on past authority (manqul). However, prior to his meeting with Hayy, he had constantly struggled with unresolved problems and difficulties.[3] Absal had reached a higher level of self-discipline than his compatriots, and believed that asceticism and solitude would help him to realise his highest spiritual ambitions. He had therefore renounced the world and had come to end his days on this little island, which he had thought to be uninhabited. 

Absal teaches Hayy conventional language and is astonished to discover that through direct intuitive experience, Hayy already knows everything that Absal had discovered to be true through his religion (shari‘a). As soon as Hayy learns about the condition of the people on the other island from Absal, he is moved with compassion and determines to seek them out and offer them the benefits of his knowledge. Accordingly,the two friends set out together, with Absal acting as an intermediary for his friend.[4] However, they fail in their pedagogic mission because Hayy’s exposition of the truth is far above the heads of his audience, who regard it with suspicion as a dangerous innovation. Salaman, the ruler of the island, along with his people, find Hayy’s teachings to be beyond their customary framework of expectations, it threatens their way of life. Enslaved by the hereditary chains of the five senses, their intelligence (‘aql) can only respond to concrete imagery (za'hir) while their moral nature is in most cases stimulated by nothing higher than the promise of rewards and the threat of punishments. Hayy soon sees enough to convince him that the life that this island’s people lead following Prophet Muhammad’s (Peace Be Upon Him) teachings, as expressed in the Qur’an, is the only effective method in their case. He respectfully apologises to them for his intrusions, and is content to see them remain faithful to the religion of their fathers. He then returns with his friend Absal to the uninhabited island.[5]. Throughout the tale Hayy’s quest is always on behalf of the truth: he is constantly willing to seek out the truth about things.

[1] Sharah Fiqh Al Akbar by Mullah Ali Qari (He Quoted it from Hakeem Al Shahid d.334H).

[2] Another version of the story tells that Hayy floats towards the island in a box which was sent out by his mother- a remote allusion to the fate of Moses in the Qur’an (Q. 20:38-40).On the history of different versions of the story of Hayy, see A-M. Goichon‚ Hayy b.Yakzan, EI ², III, p. 330-34.

[3]Ibn Tufayl, Risala Hayy bin Yaqzan, Pg 144. The edition used here is Risala Hayy bin Yaqzan, ed. Léon Gauthier, reprint of the Edition Beirut 1936 by Fuat Sezgin (Frankfurt: Ma‘had Tarikh al-‘Ulum al-‘Arabiyya wa’l-Islamiyya, 1999)

[4]Ibn Tufayl, Risala Hayy bin Yaqzan, Pg 144-146

[5]]Ibn Tufayl, Risala Hayy bin Yaqzan, Pg 147-155.

→Note: The above commentary of the story is taken from the Thesis, "The development of dialectic and argumentation theory in post-classical Islamic intellectual history by Mehmet Kadri Karabela.

Imam Maturidi and the Hanafi School

Imam Abu Mansur Al Maturidi as the faithful successor of Imam Abu Hanifa.

The heresiographies, remaining silent does not necessarily mean that Al-Māturīdī was entirely neglected or passed over in the pertinent medieval Literature. On the contrary, there are two other genres of sources in which observations on his doctrines are to be culled; these even provide a specific interpretive image to his name. Yet in order to properly categorize these representations of Al-Māturīdī, one must first consider the geographical and temporal Circumstances in which they emerged and were conveyed. The first remarks on our theologian naturally originate from the region in which he was active, namely, Transoxania. When reflecting on the nature of their theological tradition, scholars of that region from the fifth/eleventh century held that it had been decidedly imprinted by al-Māturīdī’s contributions. This is the sense of the testimony given by Abū l-Yusr al-Pazdawī (d.493/1100)[1] for instance, and by his younger contemporary Abū l-Muʿīn al-Nasafī (d.508/1114), who expressed the same thoughts even more pronouncedly[2]. Neither of them, intended to identify al-Māturīdī as the founder of Sunnī theology in Transoxania, however. To them he was rather an outstanding representative of the same; not as a founder, but as a thinker who masterfully laid out and interpreted a long-standing theological doctrine. Instead, they were in agreement on placing Abū Ḥanīfa (d. 150/767) at the original genesis of the school. He was remembered as having provided the correct answers to all definitive questions in matters of faith, and what he taught is supposed to have been transmitted and elaborated upon by all his successors in Bukhārā and Samarqand without detectable alteration.

In the writings of al-Pazdawī, this position is expressed in two ways. First, he calls his own school, not the “Māturīdīya,” but deliberately aṣḥāb Abī Ḥanīfa [3]. Having said this, he repeatedly endeavors to reiterate to the reader that one or another particular doctrine had, of course, already been professed by Abū Ḥanīfa[4]. Al-Nasafī’s remarks are even more explicit and systematic. He does not merely rely on the fact that the great Kufan is cited by name in northeastern Iran every now and then. His goal was to prove that Abū Ḥanīfa’s doctrine had in fact been passed on from generation to generation intact and without interruption. To that end, he used the topic of God’s attributes as an instructive example, writing what was to be understood as an affirmation of tradition and a program for the future: Al-Nasafī begins this with the statement that in the entirety of Transoxania and Khurāsān, all the leading figures of Abū Ḥanīfa’s companions (inna a⁠ʾimmata aṣḥābi Abī Ḥanīfa . . . kullahum) that followed his way in the principles (uṣūl) as well as the branches ( furūʿ), and that stayed away from iʿtizāl (i.e., the doctrine of the Muʿtazilites), had already “in the old days” held the same view (on God’s attributes) as he did[5]. In order to prove this, a historical digression follows, in which names of earlier prominent Ḥanafites of Transoxania are listed. In this presentation, al-Nasafī describes the history of the Samarqand school, running through a contiguous chain of scholars with apparently equivalent theological perspectives. This chain begins with Abū Ḥanīfa, continues with Muḥammad b. al-Ḥasan (al-Shaybānī), and continues through the ranks on to al-Māturīdī and his successors[6]. Al-Māturīdī is viewed in this presentation as a member—albeit a prominent one of a homogenous series of theologians. His merit is supposed to have come from advocating theological doctrine in a particularly brilliant and astute manner; this was a doctrine, however, that all the other scholars followed in principle as well. Because of this, al-Nasafī repeats in several places that al-Māturīdī always deferred to the statements of the school founder from Kufa[7]  and when he praises al-Māturīdī it is with the honorific of “the most knowledgeable person on the views of Abū Ḥanīfa” (aʿraf al-nās bi-madhāhib Abī Ḥanīfa)[8].

It is noteworthy that we can detect an apologetic undertone with al-Pazdawī as well as with al-Nasafī. This was directed at the Ashʿarites of Nishapur, who had apparently censured the Transoxanians for allowing unacceptable innovations in their theology. At the focal point of this critique was the doctrine of divine attributes professed in Samarqand and the surrounding areas. This was denounced by the Ashʿarites as a heretical innovation of the fifth/eleventhcentury that none of the predecessors (salaf ) had adhered to[9] Such a critique, however, was obviously easy to disprove on a historical basis: It was undeniable that al-Māturīdī had been active at the turn of the fourth Islamic century, contemporaneous with al-Ashʿarī, one might add[10]. An even more convincing counter-argument aimed to antedate al-Māturīdī: If Abū Ḥanīfa stood behind the entire Transoxanian theological tradition, then the circumstances could be explained and vindicated from every doubt: in this light, the aṣḥāb Abī Ḥanīfa of Samarqand not only adhered to proper doctrine, but could maintain its legitimacy through the important Islamic principle of historical seniority. Admittedly this apologetic argument did not promulgate any entirely novel view of things, but for this same reason it must have been viewed as cogent and rather plausible, given the established custom which stood behind it. Indeed, Abū Ḥanīfa’s name had been cited in Transoxania in this manner for a long period of time. Already by the third/ninth century, texts named him as the highest authority, and al-Māturīdī, too, did not fail to demonstrate his reverence for him in many instances[11]. Thus if al-Pazdawī and al-Nasafī pointed to the great Kufan as the actual authority of Transoxanian theology, this was not decisive for Abū Ḥanīfa’s lauded status, but rather against al-Māturīdī’s, or to be more precise, against the conceivable possibility of selecting him as the new leader and eponym of the school. His emergence did not signify a break in the teachings of faith; his doctrine was in no way a new paradigm. What really mattered was the tradition itself, and by paying homage to this tradition arose the image of Abū Ḥanīfa as school founder, with Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī as his brilliant interpreter.

Once this decision was taken, it gained credency in times to follow. It is thus unsurprising that we commonly read in later literature about the Abū Ḥanīfa-school of northeastern Iran. Ibn al-Dāʿī, for example, a Shīʿite author of the sixth/twelfth century, relates that the theologians of Transoxania of his time are Ḥanafites with determinist leanings[12]. Tāj al-Dīn al-Subkī (d. 771/1370) described the doctrine of the Māturīdīya two hundred years later, saying that it was the doctrine of aṣḥāb Abī Ḥanīfa[13]. Even the Ottoman scholar Kamāl al-Dīn al-Bayāḍī (d. 1078/1687), committed without a doubt to al-Māturīdī’s ideas, also rotely cited the same tradition: His main theological work bears the title Ishārāt al-marām ʿan ʿibārāt al-imām, and states after just a few lines that the foundation of all religious knowledge is to be found in the articulations of the “leader of leaders” (imām al-a⁠ʾimma), i.e., Abū Ḥanīfa[14].

[1] Abū l-Yusr Muḥammad al-Pazdawī, K. Uṣūl al-dīn, ed. Hans Peter Linss (Cairo, 1383/1963), 2.-2ff. Hereafter cited as Uṣūl.

[2] Abū l-Muʿīn Maymūn b. Muḥammad al-Nasafī, Tabṣirat al-adilla, ed. Claude Salamé (Damascus, 1990–93), vol. 1, 358.15 ff. Hereafter cited as Tabṣira.

[3] Uṣūl, 190.9.

[4] On the doctrine of attributes (ibid, 70.11f.); on  human capability for action (ibid., 115.14ff.); on the concept of belief (ibid., 152.6ff.).

[5] Tabṣira, vol. 1, 356.6–8.

[6] Ibid., vol. 1, 356.8–357.9.

[7] For example, ibid, vol. 2, 705.9ff. And  829.1f.

[8] Ibid., vol. 1, 162.2f

[9] Ibid., vol. 1, 310.8ff. compare also al-Pazdawī’s reaction, Uṣūl, 69.10ff. and 70.5ff. On this General theme, see Rudolph, “Das Entstehen der Māturīdīya,” ZDMG  147 (1997): 393–404.

[10] The chronological comparison with al-Ashʿarī must have played a role in the polemic, as Tabṣira, vol. 1, 240.8ff. shows, where it is explicitly stated that al-Māturīdī adhered to a particular doctrine that was only later adopted by the Ashʿarīya.

[11]  Cf. Abū Manṣūr Muhammad  b. Muḥammad al-Māturīdī, K. al-Tawḥīd, ed. Fathalla Kholeif (Beirut, 1970), 303.15, 304.1, 369.21, 382.19 [ hereafter cited as Tawḥīd]; idem, Ta’wīlāt al-Qurʾān, ed. Ahmet Vanholu (Istanbul, 2005), vol. 1, 81.8, 105.7, 121.8, 158.10, 193.8, 231.1, 343.11, 354.4, 369.14, 393.2, 408.5 and many others (cf. the indices of the other volumes) [hereafter cited as Taʾwīlāt].

[12]  In Ibn al-Dāʿī, K. Tabṣirat al-ʿawāmm fī maʿrifat maqālat al-anām, ed. ʿAbbās Iqbāl (Tehran, 1313/1934), 91.9: “Ḥanafiyān-i bilād-i Khurāsān u-kull-i mā-warāʾa-nahr u-Farghāna u-bilād- Turk jabrī bāshand.”

[13]  See the following section.

[14] Kamāl al-Dīn al-Bayāḍī, Ishārāt al-marām min ʿibārāt al-imām, ed. Yūsūf ʿAbd al-Razzāq (Cairo, 1368/1949), 18.5f. with an enumeration of works attributed to Abū Ḥanīfa (in this edition, page 18  is the first page of text of the Ishārāt).

→Note:- The above passages are taken from the book, "Al-Māturīdī and the Development of Sunnī Theology in Samarqand" by Sir Ulrich Rudolph, Pg 7-9.

Fiqh

Derivation of Islamic Law from the Qur'an and Hadith.