Imam Abu Hanifa - His Life, Opinions and Fiqh

ather than an non-Arab. In their view all were the same. Indeed, they preferred that the khalif should not
be from Quraysh so that it would be easier to depose or kill him if he opposed the Shari‘a or deviated
from truth, since then there would be no partisanship to protect him, tribe to defend him, or shelter but the
shelter of Allah.
• Najdite Kharijites thought that people did not need a khalif at all. Muslims should be equitable in their
mutual dealings. They thought that if that could only be achieved by means of having a khalif to
encourage them to uphold the truth and establish it, then it was permitted. But in their view the existence
of a khalif was not a necessary obligation but was merely permitted when needed for public welfare.
• The Kharijites thought that people who committed wrong actions were unbelievers. They did not
differentiate between a sin which was done with an evil intention and an error of opinion or ijtihad which
led to something incorrect. That is why they said that ‘Ali was an unbeliever when he agreed to arbitration
although it was not his choice. If, in their opinion, arbitration was not correct, then the fact that they said
‘Ali was an unbeliever indicates that they considered that an error in ijtihad takes a person out of the deen.
That was also their view of Talha, az-Zubayr, ‘Uthman and other great Companions who differed from
them in minor matters – they held that they were unbelievers. They had various justifications for this
which were based on false interpretation of ayats of the Qur’an.
This is the sum of the opinions which most of the Kharijites embraced while they did not agree on other
positions, opinions or views. They frequently disagreed on even the smallest of matters. Perhaps this is the
secret of the great number of their defeats. They were divided into many groups.
Murji’ites
The Murji‘ites began as a political group but, like the other sects, they began to mix politics with the
principles of the deen. The basis of their difference was a negative view of a matter which preoccupied many
Muslim minds at the time: the question of the status of someone who commits a major sin. This question
animated the Kharijites, Shi‘ites and Mu‘tazilites. However, as they began politically, we consider them to be
a political group.
The first seed which produced this group was sown in the time of the Companions, at the end of the rule of
‘Uthman when there was unrest about his rule which ultimately culminated in his murder. A group of
Companions remained silent and refused to participate in the civil war which shook the Muslims profoundly.
They held to the hadith reported by Abu Bakr from the Prophet: “There will be civil strife in which those who
sit will be better than those who walk, and those who walk will be better than those who run. When it comes,
whoever has camels should stay with his camels; whoever has sheep should stay with his sheep; and whoever
has land should cling to his land.” A man said, “Messenger of Allah, what about someone who has neither
camels, sheep or land?” He replied, “He should go to his sword and blunt its edge with a stone and then save
himself if he can.”
They refused to become involved in the war between the Muslims and did not concern themselves with
ascertaining who was in the right. They included Sa‘d ibn Abi Waqqas, Abu Bakra, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Imran and
many others. They refused to make a judgement about either group and left the matter to Allah while other
parties were quick to apportion blame.
Then, when there was a lot of discussion about people who commit a major sin and the Kharijites claimed
that such people were unbelievers and made war on all Muslims, some such people refused to take sides in the
argument and withheld (irja’) judgement as they had withheld judgement on other occasions. Hence they were
called Murji’ites (“deferrers”). This time the deferment of judgement was not a political one as the first had
been but a doctrinal one, implying that belief consists of affirmation, assent, belief, and knowledge, that an act
of disobedience does not impair faith, that faith is distinct from action.
So the term “Murji’ite” was applied to two groups: one who refused to take sides in the disagreement
between the Companions and which continued into the Umayyad period and a second group who thought that
Allah would forgive all sins except disbelief and so an act of disobedience did not harm faith just as an act of
obedience was of no benefit without faith. Unfortunately, there were corrupt people within this school who