أنوع النقد الأصولي للأحاديث عند الحنفية

Abstract

Abstract

The prophetic tradition (Sunnah) constitutes the second source of legislation for Muslims after the Holy Quran. However, unlike the Quran, whose authenticity and authority are unequivocal, the individual traditions vary in their authenticity. Hence, there is divergence among scholars regarding the methodologies of accepting and critiquing these traditions. Just as methodologies varied among traditionists, they also varied among jurists. In this study, I examine the types of juristic critique of traditions among the Hanafis, elucidating two main types: Hadith-based and inferential. The Hadith-based critique encompasses the chain of transmission (isnad) and the text (matn), focusing on their authenticity, continuity, the conditions of narrators, and other factors. The inferential critique assesses the suitability of a tradition for deducing legal rulings. The Hanafis adopted a unique approach in critiquing traditions, agreeing with traditionists on many aspects while differing with them on others. They were often criticized for their alleged ignorance of prophetic traditions and their methodologies. This research sheds light on the meticulous approach followed by the Hanafis in accepting, rejecting, or utilizing traditions for legal inference.