|
Video
& Audio Cassettes Vcd's
and Dvd's

|
| |
The Madhhab of the People of Hadeeth
By :Imaam Abul-’Alee Muhammad Ibn ’Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn
’Abdur-Raheem al-Mubaarakfooree (d.1352)
Source : Tuhfatul-Ahwadhee (1/351)
Translated By : Abul-Hasan Maalik
http://www.therighteouspath.com
Know that the scholars of the Hanafee school of thought maintain that
Imaam at-Tirmidhee was of the Shaafi`ee school of thought and some of
them say that he was Hanbalee and this is their statement of which their
mouths have put forth and falsehood that which they claim! For the truth
of the matter is that he was neither Shaafi`ee nor Hanbalee, just as he
was neither Maalikee, nor Hanafee. Rather, he was - may Allaah have mercy
upon him - from the people of hadeeth; adhering to the Sunnah, working by
it. He was a Mujtahid, not a blind follower of any one from the people.
And this is apparent to any one who has read his Jaami’ and has examined
it and reflected upon it. And what is astonishing is how they maintain
that he was Shaafi`ee or Hanbalee. Did they not know that if he was Shaafi`ee, blindly following Imaam
ash-Shaafi`ee he would have given
precedence to the madhhab of his Imaam, ash-Shaafi`ee, in all of the
issues where there is difference of opinion or most of them over the other
madhhabs and he would have supported it and aided it as is the case with
those who blindly follow, but he did not, rather he refuted the statement
of ash-Shaafi`ee in many places in his book. Do you not see that in the
chapter of the delaying of Salaatudh-Dhuhr in the extreme heat after the
narration of al-Ibraad,“...and a number of the people of knowledge have
preferred the delaying of Salaatudh-Dhuhr in extreme heat, from them:
Ibnul-Mubaarak and Ahmad and Ishaaq. Ash-Shaafi`ee said, “Certainly al-Ibraad [1] for Salaatudh-Dhuhr is only if the people
find difficulty due to distance form the mosque. As for the one who prays
alone or prays in the mosque of his people then that which I like for him
is not to delay the salaat in the extreme heat.” As for those who have
chosen to delay Salaatul-Dhuhr in the extreme heat this is more
appropriate closer to the adherence of the Sunnah. As for the opinion of
Imaam ash-Shaafi`ee, that the permission to delay is for one affected by
distance from the mosque because of the difficulty upon the people, verily
what is in the hadeeth of Aboo Dharr points to the opposite of what Imaam
ash-Shaafi`ee said. Aboo Dharr said, “We were with the Prophet (sallAllaahu
’alayhi wa sallam) in a journey, so Bilaal called the adhaan for
Salaatul-Dhuhr. The Prophet (sallAllaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) said, “ O
Bilaal, when it is cool, when it is cool.” So if the matter was as Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee says, there would have been no reason for
al-Ibraad at
that time due to their all being together while on a journey so there was
no difficulty upon them due to distance.” Do they not have knowledge
that he (at-Tirmidhee) said in the chapter of the one who prays the
obligatory Prayer then goes to lead the people after that, “This is the
practice of our companions, ash-Shaafi`ee, Ahmad and Ishaaq,” and he
says in the chapter of the man who accepts Islaam and has ten women, [2]
“...the practice upon the hadeeth of Ghaylaan with our companions from
them ash-Shaafi`ee [3] and Ahmad and Ishaaq.” He says
in the chapter of what has come in regards to the Prayer in the dwellings
of sheep and the resting places of camels, [4] “And
upon this is the practice of our companions and the saying of Ahmad and
Ishaaq.”
So these statements of at-Tirmidhee are a clear illustration that Imaam
at-Tirmidhee was not Shaafi`ee nor was he Hanbalee so the statement of
the one who claims this has been clearly negated. So if you ask what is
intended by his statement “our companions,” I say, Imaam Aboo ’Eesaa
at-Tirmidhee was from the people of hadeeth and his madhhab was that of
the people of hadeeth, so the intention of his statement “our
companions” was Ahlul-Hadeeth. Al-Qaaree said in al- Mirqaat Sharhul-
Mishkaat, an explanation of the statement of at-Tirmidhee “...he
is considered weak amongst our companions, that is, the people of
hadeeth.” I say this is the truth of the matter of which the
aforementioned statements of at-Tirmidhee points to.
Some of the Hanafiyyah say in their commentary on Jaami’ut-Tirmidhee,
“As for the madhhab of the authors of as-Sihah it is said that al-Bukhaaree
(d.256H) was Shaafi’ee, but the truth of the matter is that al-Bukhaaree
was mujtahid. As for Muslim I am not certain to what his madhhab was. As
for Ibn Maajah, perhaps he was Shaafi`ee and that at-Tirmidhee was Shaafi`ee. As for Aboo Daawood and
an-Nisaa‘ee, what is commonly
understood is that they were Shaafi`ee. The truth of the matter is that
they were Hanbalee. Certainly the books of Hanbalee fiqh are filled with
the narration’s of Aboo Daawood on Imaam Ahmad.”
I say just as al-Bukhaaree – may Allaah have mercy upon him - was a
follower of the Sunnah, adhering to it, a mujtahid, not a blind follower
of any of the four imaams or other than them. So was the case with Muslim
and Aboo Daawood and an-Nisaa‘ee and Ibn Maajah. All of them were
followers of the Sunnah, working by it, not blind followers of any of the
people. As for the conclusion that Aboo Daawood and an-Nisaa‘ee were
Hanbalee by the fact that the books of Hanbalee fiqh are filled with the
narration’s of Aboo Daawood on Ahmad, than this is baseless! Even if the
books of Hanbalee fiqh were filled with the narration’s of Abee Daawood,
this does not necessitate the fact that he was Hanbalee, do you not see
that the books of Hanafee fiqh are filled with narration’s of Imaam Abee
Yoosuf and Imaam Muhammad, and with that they were not considered Hanafee,
blind followers of Abee Haneefah.
Know that these few have claimed that Aboo Daawood and an-Nisaa‘ee were
blindly following Imaam Ahmad absolutely, without restriction, then
condescended from this statement after taking heed. He says elsewhere in
his commentary on Jaami’ut-Tirmidhee, “Yahyaa Ibn Ma’een was of the
Hanafee madhhab, as found in at-Taareekh of Ibnul- Khalkaan, except the
taqleed of the Salaf was the taqleed of the ijtihaadaat of which there was
nothing established in it from the marfoo’ (suspended) or mawqoof
(stopped), not like the taqleed of ours, and this is my belief.”
I say there is no established proof that Imaam Aboo Daawood and an-Nisaa‘ee
were blind followers of Imaam Ahmad in the ijtihaadaat and certainly this
is only their conjecture and certainly conjecture is no substitute for the
truth! And as for his statement, “As for Ibn Maajah perhaps he was
Shaafi’ee,” points to the fact that they have no proof that Ibn Maajah
was Shaafi’ee. One of the Hanafiyyah says in the introduction to the
explanation of Saheeh Muslim, “Some of those skilled in the knowledge of
the narrations say, as for al- Bukhaaree and Aboo Daawood they were imaams
in fiqh, from the people of ijtihaad. As for Muslim, at-Tirmidhee, an-Nisaa‘ee
(d.303H), Ibn Maajah, Ibn Khuzaymah, Aboo Ya’laa, al-Bazzaar and the
likes of them, they are from the madhhab of the people of hadeeth, not
blindly following anyone from the people, nor were they absolutely from
the people of ijtihaad. Rather, they leaned towards the statement of the
imaams of hadeeth, like ash-Shaafi’ee (d.204H) and Ahmad and Ishaaq and
Abee ’Ubayd and those who are like them. And they are closer to the
madhhab of the people of Hijaaz than the madhhab of the people of al-’Iraaq.
As for Aboo Daawood at-Tiyaalisee, he preceded all of them being from the
generation of Yahyaa Ibn Sa’eed al-Qattaan and Yazeed Ibn Haaroon al-Waasitee
and ’Abdur-Rahman al-Mahdee and the likes of them from the generation of
the teachers of Imaam Ahmad. And all of them went to the greatest efforts
in the following the Sunnah. Although there were from them who leaned
toward the madhhab of the people of al-’Iraaq, like Wakee’ and Yahyaa
Ibn Sa’eed, and from them those who leaned toward the madhhab of the
people of al-Madeenah, like ’Abdur-Rahmaan al-Mahdee. As for
ad-Daaraqutnee, he leaned towards the madhhab of ash-Shaafi’ee, though
he was one who made ijtihaad, and he was from the imaams of hadeeth and
Sunnah. His situation was not like some who came after him from the
Scholars of Hadeeth, adhering to taqleed (blind-following) in general,
except in a few instances of which can be counted. And certainly
ad-Daaraqutnee was stronger in ijtihaad more knowledgeable.”
And he
said, “And what is apparent is that Aboo Daawood was closer to being
Hanbalee, for certainly the books of Hanbalee fiqh are filled with his
narrations upon Ahmad.” His quoting from al-A’rfush-Shaadhee, and you
have already learned the response to it. So if you ask, if Imaam al-Bukhaare
was not Shaafi’ee following Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee then why did they
consider him Shaafi’ee and why is he mentioned in the Tabaqaatush-
Shaafi’iyyah? Al-’Allaamah Shaah Waliyyullaah ad-Dihlawee
states in his Hujjatullahul-Baalighah, “Perhaps the people of hadeeth
would be attributed to one of the schools of thought due to his agreement
with it in many issues. Like an-Nisaa‘ee and al- Bayhaqee were
attributed to ash-Shaafi`ee.” And he states in his work titled al-Insaaf,
“What is meant by the attribution to the Shaafi`ee madhhab is that he
follows him in principals of exploration of the evidences (usool), and
it’s classification. And if he sometimes differs with this there is no
concern because of it, and he does not stray from this methodology except
in some issues, and it does not affect his being considered from the Shaafi`ee
madhhab. And like this al-Imaam al-Bukhaaree (d.256H), for he
is counted from the Tabaqaatush-Shaafi’iyyah by Shaykh Taajud-Deen
as-Subkee,
he said, “He took knowledge from al- Humaydee and al-Humaydee took
knowledge from ash-Shaafi’ee.”
Al-’Allaamah Shaykh Ismaa’eel al-’Ijloonee states in his book, al-Fawaa‘idud-Daraaree
his explanation on what has preceded on al-Bukhaaree taking from al-Karabeesee
and az-Za’faraanee and Aboo Thawr making him Shaafi’ee, and they
differ in what his madhhab was. And it is said that he was Shaafi`ee in
his madhhab, and as-Subkee went to this in his Tabaqaatush- Shaafi’yyah
and he states, “Certainly he heard from al-Karabeesee and Abee Thawr and
az-Za’faraanee and took knowledge from al-Humaydee, all of them are from
the companions of ash-Shaafi`ee.” And it is stated that he was
Hanbalee. Abul-Hasan Ibnul- ’Iraaqi mentioned him in the companions of
Imaam Ahmad. Then he brought the narration from al-Bukhaaree that he said,
“I entered Baghdaad eight times and every time I sat with Ahmad ibn
Hanbal, and he said to me the last time I left him, “O Abaa ’Abdullah
will you leave the knowledge and the people and travel to Khurasaan?”
And al-Bukhaaree said, “I now recall his statement.” And it is said he
was mujtahid, this is the choice of as-Sakhaawee, he said, “And I lean
toward the fact that he was mujtahid.” This was clearly stated by
Taqiyyud-Deen Ibn Taymiyyah, he said, “Certainly he was an Imaam in fiqh
for reason of ijtihaad.
Footnotes:
| |
|