Imam Abu Hanifa - His Life, Opinions and Fiqh

Foreword
It says in al-Khayrat al-Hisan by Ibn Hajar al-Haytami al-Makki: “The renown of a man in the past is
indicated by the disagreement of people regarding him. Do you not see that when ‘Ali died, may Allah
ennoble his face, there were two parties: one of which intensely loved him and the other of which intensely
hated him?”
This test is true of many people and can also be applied to Abu Hanifa. People were partisan about him to
the extent that some people practically put him in the ranks of the Prophets and claimed that the Torah gave
the good news of him and that Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, had mentioned him by
name and stated that he was the Lamp of his Community. They attributed to him endless virtues and qualities
and exalted him above his rank. On the other hand, some people were partisan against him to a fanatical
extent, accusing him of being a heretic and of leaving the path, corrupting the deen and abandoning the Sunna.
Indeed, they accused him of contradicting it and giving fatwas regarding the deen without evidence or clear
authority. Some of them went to excess in attacking him and were not content with unfounded falsification,
but were so intensely hostile that they attacked his deen, personality and faith.
This happened even while Abu Hanifa was still alive and discussing with his students the requirements of
fatwas: what should be taken from hadith, what should be derived by analogy and rules, and how to conduct
ijtihad in a proper manner.
Why was there such disagreement about him? There are various reasons for it which shall be examined in
detail in the course of this study. But it is appropriate to mention here one reason which may be the basis of
the others. Abu Hanifa had a forceful personality which caused his method in fiqh to spread beyond his own
circle and region to other regions of the Islamic world. People discussed his views in most areas of the Islamic
world, some opposing them and some agreeing with them.
His views had opponents and supporters. Those who depended on texts alone regarded them as an
innovation in the deen and strongly objected to them. Sometimes the point of objection was not even the
opinion of Abu Hanifa, who was a scrupulous and godfearing man, but was merely something wrongly
attributed to him. The opponent would speak of it because he saw it as an innovation without knowing its
basis or who had actually said it. The sharpness of the criticism was sometimes blunted when the critic saw
him or learned the evidence on which the judgement was based. Sometimes the critic would then respect the
opinion and agree with him.
An illustration of such an instance is found in respect of al-Awza‘i, the faqih of Syria, who was a
contemporary of Abu Hanifa. He said to ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, “Who is this innovator who has emerged
in Kufa called Abu Hanifa?” Ibn al-Mubarak did not answer him, but began to mention some difficult
questions and how to understand them and give fatwa regarding them. He asked, “Who gave these fatwas?”
He replied, “A shaykh I met in Iraq.” Al-Awza‘i said, “This is a noble shaykh. Go and take a lot from him.”
“It is Abu Hanifa,” he stated. After that al-Awza‘i and Abu Hanifa met in Makka and discussed the questions
which Ibn al-Mubarak had mentioned. He investigated them. When they parted, al-Awza‘i said to Ibn al-
Mubarak, “I envy the man his great knowledge and intelligence. I ask forgiveness of Allah. I was in clear
error. Devote yourself to the man. He is not as they say about him.” (al-Khayrat al-Hisan, p. 33)
The conflict between his supporters and opponents intensified in the fourth century AH when madhhab
partisanship became prevalent and fiqh was debated by partisans. There were debates in people’s houses and
in mosques about these matters so that whole days were spent in debates and arguments about madhhab. Each
was a supporter of his Imam and partisan on his behalf. It is in this time that most of the biographies of the
Imams were written, usually with excessive praise of the particular Imam in question and attacking the others.
The conflict was extremely severe between the Hanafis and the Shafi‘is. That is why these two Imams became
targets for bitter attacks, given the extreme partisanship of their supporters.
Abu Hanifa, of course, was a target because of the great number of fatwas he gave based on opinion which
led people to attack his knowledge of hadiths, his scrupulousness, the quality of his fatwas and other things
which were connected to his school regarding deduction and extrapolation. The fanatics attacked him for all