On his second visit to Madina Abu Hanifa met Imam Baqir, when he was introduced to Imam Baqir, the latter addressed him in the following words: “So it is you who contradicts the traditions of my grandfather on the basis of Qiyas”. Abu Hanifa said: “May Allah forbid, who dare contradict the Ahadith? After you sit down, Sayyidi, I shall explain my position.”
They had the following conversation:
Imam Abu Hanifa: “who is the weaker, man or woman?”
Imam Baqir: “woman”
Imam Abu Hanifa: “which of them is entitled to the larger share of the inheritance?”
Imam Baqir: “the woman”
Imam Abu Hanifa: “now, if I had been making more deductions through analogy, I should have said that the woman should get the larger share - because on the face of it, the weaker one is entitled to more consideration. But I have not said so.
“To take up another subject, which do you think is the higher duty, prayer or fasting?”
Imam Baqir: “prayer.”
Imam Abu Hanifa: “that being the case, it should be permissible for a woman during the period of her Hayd (menstruation) to postpone her prayers and not her fasts (which is lower than prayers). But the ruling I give is that she must postpone her fasting and not her prayers (following in the footsteps of the Prophet).”
Imam Baqir was so much impressed by his acumen and his love for the Prophet, he stood up and kissed his forehead. (Quoted from Shariah: Islamic Law by AR Doi)
The aforementioned conversation is emblematic in expressing the deep intellectualheritage of Islam and the methodological differences there are within the scholarly tradition, especially the Usuliyun (people of the principles).
There are two main traditional schools of thought when it comes to approaching the law of Islam. The inductive school (along with its various contours) which is championed by Imam Abu Hanifa and later scholars who traversed their path. And the deductive school (along with its various contours) which was championed by Imam al-Shafi’ and those who traversed his path of deductive reasoning. These different approaches even go back to the Sahaba (companions of the Prophet) themselves, the hadith of praying in Bani Quraizah being one clear example.
Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi alludes to these two camps when answering a question regarding the Niqab. He says, “the controversy will remain as long as the texts themselves — from which rulings are derived — are amenable to disagreement with respect to their authenticity and meaning. [They will remain] as long as the minds of men are of varying strength in deriving rulings [from the texts], and [differ as to] the extent to which texts are to be taken literally, or in their general tenor, or whether one should adopt a more stringent position or a more lenient one, or a cautious position or an easier one.
“The controversy will remain as long as there are those who adopt the rigorous stances of Ibn ʿUmar, and those who adopt the dispensations of Ibn ʿAbbās; as long as there are those among them who will pray ʿAṣr on the way, and those who will not pray anywhere but in [the vicinity of] Banū Quraiẓah.
“It is of the mercy of God that these kinds of differences are not forbidden and entail no sin. The [scholars] who hold the incorrect opinion are excused. In fact they earn a single reward, and there are even those who say that no one is wrong in these juristic judgments; in fact they are all correct.
“Indeed, even the Prophet’s Companions, and the righteous generations following them differed in their juristic judgments, and this did not harm them in anyway. They agreed to disagree, and continued to pray behind one another without disapproval.”
Eager students of knowledge (in my view) should thoroughly understand the different spectrums of these two schools of thought, and appreciate the deep intellectual foundation they emerge from. So that any discussion or learning we immerse ourselves in, it is done with the proper etiquette and adab.
shukran for the advice.
i pray nobody reads too much into it and accepts it as just that, sincere advice,
Please explain what you mean by that? Another of your slurs against people is it? Who is it against this time? Abu Hanifa? Imam Baqir? or Adbullah Hasan?
C’mon bro– you can be really childish sometime.
stop reading between the lines. fitnah stirrer. it’s what naughty girls do.
maybe abdullah hassan should explain?
salamu ‘alaykum,
@alpha
this blog is called ‘between the lines’
@bismillah
lol, Good one
@Captain
I didn’t mean to offend, but it is a legitimate question. What does Izzuddin mean by “i pray nobody reads too much into it”?
He should explain! I hope he doesn’t mean the usual – ‘legitimate’ difference of opinion. Which is a nasty cheap unislamic way of dismissing people that they disagree with. This is a salafi-jihadi trend which is unislamic and goes against the what the companions did (as AH shows in this blog).
Hasan al-Banna followed this tradition of multiple correct answers. He also believed in the great Islamic tradition of “I think I am right, but I could be wrong. I think you’re wrong, but you could be right.”
Instead we have google scholars who have to prove they are the only right ones and by definition others must be wrong. And then the ones they think are wrong by definition are also not scholars. This is the new unislamic trend ggogle scholar trend.
I wont reply to Alpha, who suddenly pops up to make nasty comments. Ignoring him/her is best thing to do.
Salaam, thank you for the naseeha.
The article was well written. Why would people read into it and believe it be other than a sincere naseeha?
@Abdalla
Your comment explains it all, you’re already reading between the lines!
Salaam all,
Can someone please give me the reference for this converation between Imama Abu Hanifah and Imam Baqir?
This story is not true. It’s the other way around. Imam baker asked Abu hanifa about the prayers and inheritance and proved Abu hanifa wrong. Shame on you. You should have known better. What will you say to allah
“Abu Hanifa sat for a long time at Imam Baqir’s feet and acquired from him much valuable knowledge of Fiqh and Hadith not available anywhere else. Shia’s and Sunni’s are agreed that Abu Hanifa derived much of his learning from Baqir. He learned a great deal from the imam’s son, Ja’far al-Sadiq also, which fact is generally mentioned in the history books. Ibn Taymeeya, however, denies this on the ground that Abu Hanifa and Ja’far al-Sadiq were contemporaries and equals, which ruled out the probability of the former being the latter’s pupil. But I consider this sheer imprudence and lack of comprehension on Ibn Taymeeya’s part. For all his greatness as an original thinker and master of fiqh, Abu Hanifa could not compare in learning with Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq. The Ahl’ul bayt were the fountainhead of Fiqh and Hadith and, in fact, all religious learning. “The master of the house knows best what is in it”, to quote a well-known Arabic saying”. (Imam Abu Hanifa, by Allamah Shibli Numani page 40).
Can some one tell me the ages of Imam Baqir and Imam Abu Hanifa at the time of this conversation? This does not seem right as Abu Hanifa attended lectures of Imam Baqir’s some Imam Sadiq in Medina and acknowledged him to be the most learned man in the world of Islam.