Thread by @imanmbadawi

Students of the Hanafi School often come to observe, with time, that the usūl, qawā’id, and dawābit of the madhhab are (in many cases) derived directly or indirectly from the Quran and Sunna. This is a magnificent aspect of the Hanafi thought system.

I gather these examples.

There are so many examples in which the Imāms tried squeezing as much ‘fiqh-juice’ from the Hadīth corpus as possible.

They’d derive whole principles from matters to which we’d scarcely give second thought.

I never ceased to be amazed by the depth of their reading of the Sunna.

Abu Hanīfa didn’t just take the contents of the Prophet’s actions as evidence but even their mode.

It’s so important to recognize how these Imāms employed their intellect. The Sunna wasn’t just texts to them. It was a comprehensive whole.

Upon deeper study, it becomes clear that the slightest accusation against the Imām of being negligent of Hadīth in favor of رأي is absurd.

Further, in giving precedence to the legal opinions of the Sahaba, he was also attempting to capture the Sunna & its proper interpretation.

I don’t think we quite fathom what these Imāms did. The work is already done for us.

I often ponder about the young Abu Hanifa. There was no madhhab before him. No structured usūl. There was transmission and talaqqi. That’s it.

I ponder over the *usūl before the usūl*…

When contemplating the ‘usūl before the usūl’, I often get into a chicken-or-egg dilemma.

There is no fiqh without Hadīth, no Sunna without fiqh.

You can’t read the Hadīth corpus without interpretive guidelines.

It’s as if these Imām’s were naturally imbued with aptitude.

No doubt, that’s part of Allah’s promise to preserve & protect the revelation, but it can also tell us something important about how we can develop that aptitude.

The question is, when we study fiqh, is that what we’re after?

The work hasn’t all been done. There’s a lot more.

This would take years of very deep study with a certain trajectory and a unique pedagogy. It’d be foolish to claim having even approached it.

This is a goal that can’t be achieved by any one person, rather it requires a shared scholarly trajectory and contribution.

If we acknowledge that a madhhab is the evolutionary development of a thought-system through a collective scholarly contribution upon established foundational principles,

why can’t we recognize that to make headway in modern times, we also need to unify scholarly trajectory?

The current state of scholarship, in & out of academia, is completely chaotic. Everyone’s doing their own thing. That’s not the way a thought-system works and it’s certainly not the way to become a part of that intrinsic evolution that we call “tradition”.

Thought-systems unify

This post is also meant to give an appreciation of what a thought system is and how foolish it is for anyone lacking the aptitude of the Imams to make a judgment on something they can’t even conceive.

I may never fully understand the young Abu Hanifa, but I’ll continue trying.

May Allāh’s choicest mercy be upon him and all the great Imams of this Umma whose theory, practice, spirit and contribution is our lifeline to the Revelation.

May Allāh be pleased with the Sahaba.

May Allah’s infinite peace and blessings be upon Rasūlullah and his folk

Amīn