kitaab al athaar by imam abu hanifa

[hearandobey]

assalamu alaykum,

i came accross this and i'm quite interesting in purchasing it, however i'd like to know first if this really does go back to imam abu hanifa.

any information?

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
It would be interesting to see how many narrations from imam abu hanifa are authenticated. I would rather see a takhrij by a non-subcontinental scholar

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
I just read from Sh Abdul-'Aziz Al-Taraifi that he considers the book inauthentic because Muhammad bin Al-Hasan is a weak narator:

لسؤال الثاني والستون: ما رأيكم بكتاب

الآثار للقاضي أبي يوسف صاحب أبي حنيفة؟ هل هو موثق عنه؟
الجواب : كتاب الآثار لأبي يوسف صاحب أبي حنيفة ثابت عنه، وأبو يوسف في كتابه الآثار لا يريد التأصيل ونقل فقه أبي حنيفة، فقد خالف شيخه في نحو ثلثي مذهبه كما ذكر ذلك ابن عابدين في حاشيته، وإنما هو رأي له، إلا ما نص فيه أنه قول أبي حنيفة .
السؤال الثالث والستون: وما رأيكم بالآثار التي يخرجها محمد بن الحسن في كتبه؟ وهل يقبل نقل محمد بن الحسن؟
الجواب : الآثار التي يخرجها محمد بن الحسن في كتابه (الآثار) في النفس منها شيء، فمحمد بن الحسن ليس بالحافظ، وكثير ما يغير المتون، فهو يتصرف بها كثيراً، فهو إمام في الرأي أما في النقل فبحاجة لمن يعضده .
ومن اراد اللقاء كاملاً...فليضغط هنا... (http://forum.fwaed.org/showthread.php?threadid=49025)
---

Also ibn hajar said:

ابن حجر في اتحاف المهرة -ص159-: ثم أضفت إلى هذه الكتب الستة أربعة كتب أخرى وهي ..وشرح معاني الاثار للطحاوي، لأني لم أجد عن أبي حنيفة مسندا يعتمد عليه

And ibn hazm said in al-muhalla bil athaar

فهذا كان أولى بهم من الاعتراض على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بآرائهم المنتنه التى لا تساوى رجيع كلب * وروينا من طريق أبى عبيد أنه ناظر في هذه المسألة محمد بن الحسن فلم يجد عنده أكثر من ان قال: هذا من حديث أبى هريرة

قال على: نعم هو والله من حديث أبى هريرة البر الصادق لامن حديث مثل محمد ابن الحسن الذى قيل لعبد الله بن المبارك: من أفقه أبو يوسف أو محمد بن الحسن؟ فقال: قل: أيهما أكذب

So i would not recommend buying such a book except for a peson who can know the weak from the sahih. Besides Imam Abu Hanifa rahimahullah himself is weak in hadith as a narrator as said by nasai,muslim,ibn hibban, al-daraqutni and others.

[hearandobey]

jazakAllahu khayran!!

that was very useful mashallah. may Allah swt reward you in this dunya and the next, ameen.

[hearandobey]

brother, have you come accross "bustaan al-muhadditheen" by shah wali-Allah... what are your thoughts?

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Bustan is originally in persian by shah waliullah's son, shah 'abdul'aziz dehlavi.Its basically a list of books of hadith along with some discription of their rspective authors, the manuscrips of these books (nusakh) along with the copiers of these manuscripts, and the differences of the manuscripts in some details along with some fiqhi details. Abdul hai lucjnowy took exception to some of his fiqhi stances there. The book has been translated to arabic. Here is the full name of the book
بستان المحدّثين في بيان كتب الحديث وأصحابها الغرّ الميامين.

[Um Abdullah M.]

Bismillah
I just read from Sh Abdul-'Aziz Al-Taraifi that he considers the book inauthentic because Muhammad bin Al-Hasan is a weak narator:


Also ibn hajar said:

ابن حجر في اتحاف المهرة -ص159-: ثم أضفت إلى هذه الكتب الستة أربعة كتب أخرى وهي ..وشرح معاني الاثار للطحاوي، لأني لم أجد عن أبي حنيفة مسندا يعتمد عليه

And ibn hazm said in al-muhalla bil athaar

فهذا كان أولى بهم من الاعتراض على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم بآرائهم المنتنه التى لا تساوى رجيع كلب * وروينا من طريق أبى عبيد أنه ناظر في هذه المسألة محمد بن الحسن فلم يجد عنده أكثر من ان قال: هذا من حديث أبى هريرة

قال على: نعم هو والله من حديث أبى هريرة البر الصادق لامن حديث مثل محمد ابن الحسن الذى قيل لعبد الله بن المبارك: من أفقه أبو يوسف أو محمد بن الحسن؟ فقال: قل: أيهما أكذب

So i would not recommend buying such a book except for a peson who can know the weak from the sahih. Besides Imam Abu Hanifa rahimahullah himself is weak in hadith as a narrator as said by nasai,muslim,ibn hibban, al-daraqutni and others.

sorry bro, but ur quoting of statements that show major qadh (i.e. lying) and such, in these big Imams only makes one even more sure of ur extremism against Hanafis, even ahl assunnah imams of Hanafi madhhab (Imam Abu Yusuf and Muhammad bin al Hasan are not free from tongues of ahl hadeeth of subcontinent.
Yah sure some contemporary scholars or ones who came shortly after made that qadh but does that mean we keep on repeating it? no, since ahl assunnah agree on their righteousness and Imamah
same as Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahu Allah, the extreme attacks on him in books like assunnah of Imam Abdullah bin Ahmad, is it right to keep on quoting the extreme statements attacking him from that book and other books?
NO !
and I dont' mean their hifdh, no problem of speaking about their hifdh if it is weak but not their 'adalah like them being liars or such.

As for Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahu Allah, plz mention that the reason for his weakening by some scholars is his memory not his 'adalah, not just a gneeral statment (weak), then some juhhal who dislike Imam abu Hanifah rahimahu Allah because of their extremism will start making qadh of his 'adalah.
and Also mention that their is difference in opinon regarding his memory, not all believed him to be weak in that.

sorry to sound harsh but I love imams of ahl assunah for sake of Allah and you don't see our scholars of ahl assunnah today repeating these quotes with very extreme attacks on these great imams ( I am speaking about 'adalah, not memory).

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
I and neither ibn hazam meant he is a liar in hadith. nor did ibn mubarak [he was asked about their fiqh and not hadith; i think that is apparent]. what was meant was his rai and usuul. do u know who imam shafa'ii's opponent was in the majority of his munazaras in kitab al-umm? none other than the person in question, imam m b al-hassan al-shaybani, rahimahullah.
And i have repeated 10 times over that imam abu hanifa is 'adl but has problems in hifdh. So now i am a munafiq according to u for having a different outside than inside?
PS: shaykh muhammad amin and other students of knowldege on arabic multaqa have more harsher views on hanafiyyah than me, check his site. Y dont u tell them of their extremism these egyptiasns and yemenis and arabs instead of shouting down ahle hadith?

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
intelectual arguments should b argued against intellectually, not a la 'Yo Extrimism' style.

Also mention that their is difference in opinon regarding his memory, not all believed him to be weak in that.

i dont know which of the mutaqaddameen held that view, except those who have two opposite views in this narrated from them like yahya bin ma'een. Infact Imam Al-Zaila'ee al-hanafi accepted him to be weak in nasb al-rayah.

[Um Abdullah M.]

Bismillah
I and neither ibn hazam meant he is a liar in hadith. nor did ibn mubarak [he was asked about their fiqh and not hadith; i think that is apparent]. what was meant was his rai and usuul.

no it wasn't apparent, not everyone has good knowledge of hadith and fiqh.
many people are laymen like myself.

do u know who imam shafa'ii's opponent was in the majority of his munazaras in kitab al-umm? none other than the person in question, imam m b al-hassan al-shaybani, rahimahullah.

so? this happens between fuqaha.

And i have repeated 10 times over that imam abu hanifa is 'adl but has problems in hifdh. So now i am a munafiq according to u for having a different outside than inside?

well make sure you mention it in every thread you mention about Imam Abu Hanifah's weakness (not necessary every post but every thread), because not everyone has read every post of urs, I haven't seen those posts ur talking about.
I also didn't call you a munafiq nor meant u to be munafiq.

and even if it is in fiqh, it is not necessary to mention it.

PS: shaykh muhammad amin and other students of knowldege on arabic multaqa have more harsher views on hanafiyyah than me, check his site. Y dont u tell them of their extremism these egyptiasns and yemenis and arabs instead of shouting down ahle hadith?

so?
I beleive that Muhammad amin is a little extreme sometimes in his views.
And there are members in multaqa who are extreme in their attacks on scholars in general let alone Hanafis.

Mostly ones who are influenced by "Madhkhalis who are similar to ahl hadeeth of subcontinent, both are extreme in this matter.

and there are things that are ok to mention in forum specificly for studnets of knowledge (for certain purpose), but not ok in a forum where you have many laymen who post or read.