semi-Ḥanafīs and Ḥanafī biographical sources

Maisonneuve & Larose

Semi-Ḥanafīs and Ḥanafī Biographical SourcesAuthor(s): Nurit TsafrirSource: Studia Islamica, No. 84 (1996), pp. 67-85Published by: Maisonneuve & LaroseStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1595995 .

Accessed: 14/12/2014 10:40

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Maisonneuve & Larose is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Studia Islamica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.66.161.33 on Sun, 14 Dec 2014 10:40:44 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=mal

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1595995?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Studia Islamica, 1996/2 (novembre) 84

Semi-Hanafis and Hanafi Biographical Sources*

All those who make use of Muslim biographical dictionaries are aware of a rather odd phenomenon: a book whose title indicates that it is a collection of biographies of members of a particular school will in fact contain biographies of scholars whose affiliation with the school is questionable, and even of men who undoubtedly did not belong to the school. In this paper I shall examine this phenomenon with particular reference to entries on early scholars in Hanafi biographical works. I shall argue that in these works the oddity in question is not - as might seem at first blush - caused only by the desire of. the compilers to demonstrate the connection with the Hanafi school of as many scholars as possible. It arises also from the nature of the Hanafi school in its early years, and reflects the fact that in these years it was not always clear whether a given scholar was or was not a member of the school.

I. Unquestionable Hanafis, Questionable Hanafis and Semi-Hanafis in the Jawahir

The best known Hanafi biographical dictionary is al-Jawabhir al-mudf'a ft tabaqat al-Hanafiyya by the Egyptian Ibn Abi al-Wafa' al-Qurashi (d. 775 A.H.), who completed the work towards the end of his life ('). TheJawabhir contains biographies of more than two thousands

* This is a revised version of a section of my Ph. D. dissertation entitled The spread of the Hanafi school in the western regions of the Abbasid caliphate up to the end of the third century A.H (Princeton University, 1993). My thanks to Michael Cook, Nimrod Hurvitz, and Ella Landau-Tasseron for their comments on earlier versions of this paper. Frank Stewart read various drafts of the paper, and I should like to thank him in particular for his valuable comments. Some of the terms used in the paper were in fact suggested by him.

(1) There is a notice in the Jawahir for the year 771 (Ibn Abi al-Wafa' al-Qurashi, al-

67



NURIT TSAFRIR

scholars, ranging from the lifetime of Abc Hanifa (d. 150 A.H.) up to the eighth century. The importance of the book is immense: it registers the Hanafi scholars who were documented in the sources extant in the eighth century, and preserves material about these scholars from earlier sources that are in some cases no longer extant.

But while many of the biographees in the Jawahir were clearly Hanafis, the affiliation of others with the Hanafi school may be ques- tioned. For the purpose of this paper I accordingly divide all the biographees in this book into two groups: unquestionable Hanafis and questionable Hanafis. I classify as unquestionable Hanafis those of whom we know that they both studied under Hanafi teachers and had Hanafi students, and also those of whom we know that they wrote Hanafi law books. Unquestionable Hanafis are, for example, the Baghdadi Muhammad b. Sama'a (d. 233 A.H.), and the Bagri Hilal al-Ra'y (d. 245 A.H.). All the rest of the biographees in the Jawahir I consider questionable Hanafis. It follows that the questionable Ianafi category contains a very wide range of people. With regard to some of them there are evi- dential problems. Consider, for instance, the case of the famous Wasiti scholar 'All b. 'Asim (d. 201 A.H.): the very short entry on him in the Jawahir contains no mention of his connection with the Hanafi school. Ibn Abi al-Wafa' may have possessed evidence of 'All's affiliation with the Hanafi school, but this evidence is not available to us, and there is no way we can tell whether his inclusion in the Jawchir is justified. With regard to other questionable Hanafi the facts are clear, but there are conceptual problems. For example, some scholars followed the Hanafi legal method together with another legal method. Are they to be considered Hanafis or not ? Other scholars were well-known as adversaries of Abu Hanifa, but nevertheless adopted or transmitted Hanafi legal precepts, as is the case of Nu'aym b. Hammad (d. 228 A.H.) (2).

In what follows I shall investigate one particular group of questionable Hanafis, those whom I shall call semi-Hanafis. Semi-Hanafis are second- century scholars whose biographies are included in theJawahir, but who are otherwise well-known as Traditionists. In the biographies of some of the semi-Hanafis in theJawahir there is no detail that relates the scholar in question to the Hanafi school, nor is any to be found in his biographies in earlier sources. Such are the cases of Yahya b. al-Yaman (d. 189

Jawahir al-mudiaft tabaqat al-Hanafiyya, 2d ed., Cairo 1413/1993, 1:59 [editor's introduction]).

(2) Nu'aym was the author of works directed against al-Shaybani and Abo Ijanifa, and is said to have fabricated anecdotes disparaging Aba Hanifa (Ibn 'Adi, al-Kamilfi du'afa' al- rijal, Beirut 1404/1984, 7:2482; Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, Beirut 1415/1994, 10:411-12). Yet an entry on Nu'aym is included in theJawahir (3:560).

68



SEMI-HANAFIS AND HANAFI BIOGRAPHICAL SOURCES

A.H.), a companion of Sufyan al-Thawri (3), Za'ida b. Qudama (d. 161 A.H.) (4), of whom Ibn Hanbal had high opinion (5), and 'Isa b. Yanus (d. 191 or 187 A.H.), a descendant of the famous Kofi Traditionist Abu Ishaq al-Sabi'i (6). In other instances, Ibn Abi al-Wafa' apparently devoted to the subject an entry on the strength of a handful of legal opinions - sometimes indeed only a single one - that the biographee is said to have transmitted from Ab IHIanifa. Among the biographies of this class may be mentioned that of 'Abdallah b. Idris (d. 192 A.H.) (7), who is known to have been a friend of Malik, and to have followed the school of Medina in many of his legal opinions (8). But other biographies describe a Tradi- tionist as a companion or a pupil of Abu Hanifa. For example:

Hafs b. Ghiyatb (d. 194 A.H.), who is said to have been a companion of al-A'mash, the eminent Traditionist of Kifa (9), and whom some Traditionists, including Yahya b. Ma'in, considered a reliable transmitter (10), is described in theJawabir as a dear companion of Abo Hanifa (11). Al-Shirazi (d. 476 A.H.), in his Tabaqat al-fuqaha', also includes

IH.af among the Hanafi scholars (12). According to other sources, however, although HIaf? attended the circle of Abo

H.anifa, he then left it after no-

ticing clear inconsistencies in Abo Hanifa's legal opinions (13); and he is reported to have criticized Abo Hanifa's qualifications as a jurist (14).

Sharik b. 'Abdallah (d. 177 A.H.), the Traditionist qadi of Kafa, is another example. In theJawabir he appears as a companion and a student of Abu

H.anifa, and is reported to have praised him (15). But Sharik was

a fierce and well-known opponent of the Murji'i dogma, of which Abu Hanifa was a leading supporter (16). Sharik carried his opposition to the point of refusing to allow prominent Murji'I Hanafis to testify in court.

(3) For his biography in the Jawahir see 3:606. That he was a companion of Sufyan al-Thawri appears in al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Ta rikh Baghdad, Cairo 1349/1931, 14:124; and Dhahabi, Siyar a'lam al-Nubala', 9th ed., Beirut 1413/1993, 8:356.

(4) Jawahir, 2:206. (5) Ibn Hanbal, Kitab al-'ilal wa-ma'rifat al-rijal, Beirut and Riyad 1408/1988, no. 3855. (6) Jawahir, 2:681. (7) Jawahir, 2:297. (8) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 9:420; Mizzi, Tahdhtb al-Kamalfit asma' al-rijal, 2d ed., Beirut

1403/1983, 14:297 ;Jawahir, 2:298. (9) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 8:197; Dhahabi, Tadhkirat al-huffaz, Haydarabad 1375/1955

(repr. ed.), 1:298. (10) Ta rikh Baghdad, 8:198. (11) Jawahir, 2:138, followed by Tamimi in his al-Tabaqat al-saniyya ft tarajim

al-Hanafiyya, Riyad 1403/1983, 3:173. (12) Shirazi, Kitab tabaqat al-fuqaha', Beirut 1970, 137. (13) Ta rikh Baghdad, 13:402. (14) Goldziher, The Zahiris, their doctrine and their history (tr. and ed. by W. Behn),

Leiden 1971, 16. (15) Jawahir, 2:248-9. (16)

Ta'r-kh Baghdad, 13:374.

69



NURIT TSAFRIR

Among those he rejected as witnesses were Abo Hanifa's son Hammad, and the two foremost pupils of Abo Hanifa, Abo Ycsuf and al-Shaybani (17). That Sharik opposed the school of Abo Hanifa and his legal methods is also documented: he is reported to have said, for example, that if every quarter of Kafa contained a wine-merchant it would still be better than if every quarter contained a follower of Abo Hanifa's ra'y (18).

Yabya b. Abt Za'ida (d. 182 A.H.) is counted in the Jawabhir among the companions of Ab

H.anifa (19). Yet the famous Traditionist Sufyan

b. 'Uyayna refers to him as min asbabina (20), a reference which places him among the Traditionists, as does another tradition, according to which Yahy) was one of the fuqaha' mubadditht ahl al-Kzfa (21). In addition, Yahya b. Abi Za'ida was considered a highly reliable transmitter (22).

Waki' b. al-Jarrab (d. 197 A.H.), the famous Kofi Traditionist, is said in theJawahir to have been among those who studied under Abao Hanifa and to have given fatwas according to Abo Ianifa's legal opinions (23). But non-Hanafi sources depict Waki' differently. He is reported to have warned the Syrian Hanafi scholar Yahya b. Salih al-Wuhbaz against using ra'y as a source of law (24) ;he appears as a Traditionist of high repute (25), who had close connections with other leading Traditionists; and he replaced Sufyan al-Thawri after the latter's death (26). Moreover, Waki' b. al-Jarrah, like Sharik b. 'Abdallah, opposed the Murji'a (27).

(17) On Hammad see Waki', Akhbar al-qudat, Beirut n.d., 3:167, where Sharik is quoted as rejecting Hammad as a witness only on rather general grounds ; but according to an account in Ta'rikh Baghdad (9:287-8), Sharik asked Hammad, who had come to testify in court, whether prayer is part of iman. Sharik's purpose was to discover whether Hammad held Murji'i views. Hammad replied in the affirmative, though in fact he believed otherwise. He justified this reply by saying that his testimony would have been considered invalid had he revealed what he really believed. On al-Shaybani see Ibn 'Adi, 6:2183; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-mizan, Beirut 1408/1988, 5:138; on Abo Yusuf see Waki', op. cit., 3:261 ; Dhahabi, Mizan al-i'tidalft naqd al-ri/al, Beirut n.d., 4:447 and Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-mizan, 6:368. See also Ibn 'Adi, 2:723.

(18) 'Ilal, no. 3593 (also in Ibn 'Adi, 4:1324, and Ta'rikh Baghdad, 13:397), and for other examples of Sharik's opposition to the Hanafi school see Abo Nu'aym al-Ibahani, Kitab ta 'rkh Isbahan, Beirut 1410/1990, 2:102; Ta'rikh Baghdad, 13:406.

(19) Jawahir, 3:586; Laknawi, Kitab al-fawa'id al-bahiyya ft tarajim al-.Hanafiyya, Cairo 1324, 224.

(20) Ta 'rikh Baghdad, 14:117; Nubala', 8:338-9. (21) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 14:118. (22) Ibn Abi Hatim al-Razi, Kitab al-jarh wa-al-ta'dil, Haydarabad n.d., 9:144-5. (23) Jawahir, 3:276-7. (24) Mizzi, Tahdhib al-Kamal, 31:380. (25) For instance, Nubala', 9:145ff. (26) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 13:469; Nubala', 9:142. (27) W. Madelung, Der Imam al-Qasim ibn Ibrahim und die Glaubenslehre der Zaidi-

ten, Berlin 1965, 238; idem, " Early Sunni Doctrine Concerning Faith as Reflected in the Kitab al-iman of Abu 'Ubayd al-Qasim b. Sallam (d. 224/839) ", Studia Islamica 32 (1970), 239.

70




These examples show why these semi-Hanafis cannot be categorized simply as Hanafis. They were associated with various things that appear to be incompatible with Hanafism in the second century. Some of them were considered reliable transmitters by such strict Traditionists as Ibn Hanbal and Yabya b. Ma'in, whereas Hanafis were usually considered unreliable transmitters. Some of them had connections with adversaries of Abu Hanifa, or were active in the opposition to him, and their aversion to Abo Hanifa or to his methods is explicitly noted in the sources.

On the other hand, as we shall see, the details which suggest that the semi-Hanafis were connected with the Hanafi school appear not only in Hanafi, but also in non-Hanafi works, and unless we have a reason to reject these details, we cannot categorize the semi-Hanafts as non-Hanafts.

II. Problems of Classification of the Hanafis, and Ibn Abi al-Waft"s Criteria

Ibn Abi al-Wafa' himself must have been aware of the fact that some of the biographies he included in theJawabir were of men whose affiliation with the Hanafi school could be disputed. He probably devoted a good deal of thought to the question of whom to include and whom to leave out of the book. Answering this question involved difficulties, which had to do with the non-Hanafi sources of the Jawahir, upon which Ibn Abi al-Wafa' relied extensively. In these non-Hanafi sources the legal affiliation of a scholar is in many cases not mentioned, and can only be inferred from indirect indications, such as the teachers, the students or the theological beliefs of the scholar in question. These indirect indications did not however always enable Ibn Abi al-Wafa' to decide whether a given scholar was a Hanafi or not, for sometimes the indications of a scholar's connection with the Hanafi school were accompanied by details according to which the same scholar also belonged to other legal circles.

This ambiguity in Abi al-Wafa"s sources reflected the historical situ- ation in the second century, when there was sometimes no clear distinc- tion between Hanafis and non-Hanafis. What we usually call a legal school was not just a group of people who accepted the same set of legal regu- lations. The adherents of each school often also shared dogmatic beliefs, political interests, attitudes towards the government or loyalty to their school and its head. But since not all the followers of Abt Hanifa shared all these things, to be a Hanafi, or a companion of Abc Hanifa, had a variety of meanings. The range of people who might be called Hanafis is large even if only matters of law are considered. A scholar who followed Hanafi law entirely, to the exclusion of all other legal traditions, would

71



NURIT TSAFRIR

occupy one end of the scale, while at the other end would be a scholar who adopted just a few Hanafi legal precepts. Between these two ex- tremes were many scholars who accepted Hanafi law in various degrees. Who, on this scale, is a Hanafi, and who is not, is largely a matter of taste.

It is clear that according to the criteria that guided Ibn Abi al-Wafa', even the slightest connection of a scholar with the Hanafi school justified the inclusion of that scholar's biography in the Jawahir. He apparently included the biographies of such figures in order to enhance the prestige of the Hanafi school by presenting among its members as many scholars as possible. That Ibn Abi al-Wafa' was moved by motives of this kind can be seen from the way he shaped his material in general. Throughout the work he uses source material in a selective way in order to present the biographees in a positive light, and to emphasize certain aspects of their lives while playing down others. He may, for instance, take from an earlier source part of a sentence which praises a scholar, but omit another part of it which is critical (28). In the same way, he may present information indicating that a given scholar followed the Hanafi legal tradition, leaving aside material which bespeaks that scholar's adherence to another legal school as well (29). Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s purpose was not, then, only to document historical facts about Hanafi scholars, but also to improve the image of the Hanafi school. The presentation of scholars who did not in fact belong to the school as having been influenced by the legal methods of Abo Hanifa was another way to achieve this purpose. This explains why

(28) Compare, for instance, the description of Muhammad b. Masruq in Kindi's Kitab al- wulat wa-kitab al-qudat, Leiden 1912, 390.19-391.1, with that in theJawabhir, 3:368.12 ; the Jawahir has a sentence about Muhammad that is almost certainly borrowed from al-Kindi, but without the mention of Mubammad's arrogance that appears in al-Kindi. Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s quotation from the biography of the qadi 'Ubaydallah b. Ahmad in Ta'rikh Baghdad breaks off where historical information stops and criticism of 'Ubaydallah starts (compare Ta 'rkh Baghdad, 10:319.12-13 tojawahir, 2:492.9-10). A quotation in the Jawahir (2:288-9) from the biography of 'Abbas b. Hamdan in Abo al-Shaykh's Tabaqat al-muhaddithin bi-Isbahan wa-al-waridin 'alayha (Beirut 1409/1989, 4:236-7) breaks off immediately before a sentence accusing 'Abbas' family of Shi'ism.

(29) The biographies of the Maghribi 'Abdallah b. Farrakh in Maliki's Kitab riyad al-nufas f tabaqat 'ulama'al-Qjayrawan wa-Ifrnqiya (Cairo 1951, 113,116) and in Qadi 'Iyad's Tartib al-madarik wa-tafsir al-masalik li-ma rifat a am madhhab Malik (Beirut [1387-8/1967-81, 1:340) say that 'Abdallah learnt fiqh from both Abo Hanifa and Malik, and followed both Maliki and Hanafi laws. In contrast, his biography in thejawahir, 2:320-1, makes no mention of 'Abdallah b. Farrakh's Maliki connection. The phrase used by Ibn Abi al-Wafa' to describe the legal affiliation of Ibn Farrakh (wa-kana i'timaduhu f al-fiqh 'ala madhhbab Abt IHanifa) is very similar to that used by Maliki authors to describe his Maliki affiliation (wa-kana i'timaduhu ft

al-.Hadith wa-al-fiqh 'ala Malik b. Anas [Tartib al-madarik, 1:340, with va-

riants in Riyat al-nufas, 113, 116, and in Dabbagh, Ma'alim al-iman ft ma'rifat ahl al- Qayrawan, Cairo 1968, 1:239, 240]). This similarity strongly suggests that Ibn Abi al-Wafa' derived some of his information about Ibn Farrakh from Maliki sources, and hence, that the Maliki affiliation of Ibn Farrakh was known to him.

72




the Jawahir contains the biography of an adversary of Abu Hanifa such as Sufyan al-Thawri, and biographies of other questionable Hanafis, such as the semi-Hanafis.

But the reason why Ibn Abi al-Wafa' included the biographies of the

semi-.Hanafis was not only his desire to demonstrate the appeal of the

school. From the material in theJawahir it is evident that according to his sources at least some of the semi-Hanafis had substantial ties with the Hanafi school, and even were close companions of Abii Hanifa. Since the semi-Hanafis are known as Traditionists, and since the Traditionist party in the second century was hostile to the Hanafi school, one wonders how reliable the source are which led Ibn Abi al-Wafa' to present the semi-Hanafis as connected with the Hanafi school, and hence, whether his account of the semi-Hanafis is correct. The rest of the paper is an attempt to examine the nature of Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s sources of information about the Hanafi links of the semi-iHanafis, and to discover whether the semi-Hanafis really were connected with the Hanafi school.

III. The IHanafi Sources of the Jawahir

The main question regarding Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s sources of information about the semi-Hanafis is whether these sources were Hanafi or not. If the information about the Hanafi links of the semi-Hanafis comes only from Hanafi sources, then we have to consider the possibility that this information was shaped by pro-Hanafi motives; if it comes from a non-Hanafi source, the chances are that the information is reliable. This question inevitably leads on to a further one: what were the sources of the Jawahir ? Was there an early Hanafi transmission of biographical information upon which theJawahir, as well as earlier sources relied, or was theJawahir the first Hanafi biographical compilation ? The following section deals with some of the Hanafi sources of theJawahir. It concludes that early Hanafi collections were an important source for the Jawabhir, and that at least some of the information in these early collections had a pro-Hanafi slant as early as the third and fourth centuries.

In his introduction to the Jawabir, Ibn Abi al-Wafa' explains why he wrote it. He says that while scholars of the other schools had compiled biographical dictionaries devoted to the members of their school, no Hanafi scholar had yet undertaken a similar enterprise (30). TheJawahir was indeed the most comprehensive Hanafi biographical work to have been written up to the eighth century. But there were in fact earlier Hanafi biographical works, and also other works written by Hanafi

(30) Jawabir, 1:5 (author's introduction).

73



NURIT TSAFRIR

authors which, though not biographical in nature, contained biographical material about Hanafis. At least some of these works were known to, and used by, Ibn Abi al-Wafa'. Among them was, for example, a work by the Egyptian Abo Ja'far al-Tahawi (d. 321 A.H.), entitled al- Ta'rikh al-kabir, which was a source, though perhaps not a direct one, of Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s information on Hanafis in Egypt (31). Another was a Tabaqat work by Muhammad b. 'Abd al-Malik b. Ibrahim al-Hamadhani (d. 521 A.H.), who is described in the Jawahir as sahib al-Tabaqat, Tabaqat al-Hanafiyya wa-al-Shafi'iyya (32); Ibn Abi al-Wafa' cites from this work many times (33).

One of these early sources merits special attention; it is the work of al-Husayn b. 'Ali al-Saymari (d. 436 A.H.). The importance of this work for us is in that it supplies information on yet earlier Hanafi sources. Al-Saymari was a distinguished Hanafi scholar, a qadi and the head of a mosque-college in Baghdad (34). He was an important source of information about Hanafis, and about other scholars as well, for al-Khatib al- Baghdadi in the Ta'rikh Baghdad (35). Al-$aymari's work was also an important source for Ibn Abi al-Wafa', usually through the Ta'rikh Baghdad (36), but also directly, or perhaps through another source: Ibn Abi al-Wafa' draws on al-Saymari also in biographies of scholars who are not dealt with in the Ta 'rkh Baghdad (37), and in biographies of scholars about whom the Khatib derived his information from sources other than al-Saymari (38). Other Hanafi authors also borrowed from the work of al-$aymari: al-Makki (d. 568 A.H.) in his Manaqib Abi Hanifa (39), al- Kardari (d. 827 A.H.) in his Manaqib Abi Hanifa (40), and al-Kaffawi (d. 990 A.H.) in Kata'ib a 'lam al-akhyar (41).

(31) Jawahir, 1:458, 461; 3:565. (32) Jawahir, 2:469. (33) Jawahir, 5:637 (index). Ibn Abi al-Wafa' reports that he saw a thick volume by

al-Hamadhani (Jawahir, 1:8 [author's introduction]), which is probably the Tabaqat. (34) Ta 'rkh Baghdad, 8:78; G. Makdisi, "Muslim Institutions of Learning in Eleventh-

Century Baghdad ", Bulletin of the school of Oriental and African studies 1961 (24), 17, 18. (35) For material about non-Hanafis transmitted to the Khatib from al-Saymari see, for

example, Ta 'rkh Baghdad, 11:74 (about the Syrian 'Abd al-A'la b. Mushir); 12:313 (about the Mawilh 'Afif b. Salim).

(36) For example, in the biography of Abo Said al-Barda'i (compare his biography in Jawahir, 1:164-5, to that in Ta'rikh Baghdad, 4:99-100).

(37) For example, Jawahir, 2:91, 709 (in the biographies of Hasan b. Abi Malik and al-Qasim b. Ma'n); 3:522 (in the biography of Mnsa b. Nagr al-Razi).

(38) In the biography of Asad b. 'Amr (Jawahir, 1:377), for instance, Ibn Abi al-Wafa' transmits from al-Saymari, but the Khatib does not (Ta rtkh Baghdad, 7:16-19).

(39) For example, Makki, Manaqib Abt Hanifa, Beirut 1401/1981, 370. (40) For example, Kardari, Manaqib Abi Hanhfa, Beirut 1401/1981, 472. (41) In the biography of al-Saymari in the Kata'ib a'lam al-akhyar, as transmitted in

Laknawi's Fawa id, 67, it is said of al-$aymari : wa-lahu kitab dakhm ft akhbar Abi .HanLfa wa-ashabihi naqalna 'anhu kathiran ft kitabina hadha. The Kata ib a'lam al-akhyar re-

74




The only compilation by al-$aymari which has been published is a small volume entitled Akhbar Abi Iranifa wa-asbabihi (henceforth Akhbar) (Haydarabad 1974; Beirut 1985). But al-$aymari's written work was more extensive than the Akhbar: the one work by him which is mentioned in the entry on him in theJawabir is described there as mujallad dakhm ft akhbar Abi Hanifa wa-asbabihi " a thick volume of accounts about Abn Hanifa and his companions "(42) ; so although this work bears a title identical to that of the Akhbar, it was probably larger than the Akhbar, which is only a slim volume. Moreover, Brockelmann records two works by al-$aymari (43).

It is not clear whether al-$aymari put in writing all the material that he transmitted. He may have transmitted information orally to the Khatib : both of them lived in Baghdad, and al-$aymari died less than thirty years before the Khatib. If al-$aymari did not write down all the material which he transmitted, this would explain why we have no indication that he compiled a work on non-Hanafi scholars, even though he transmitted information about many of them.

Al-Saymari's Sources Most of the traditions in the Akhbar are transmitted by one or other

of the following seven isnads (only the later links of these isnads are listed below; the early links differ from one tradition to another. The transmitters in each isnad are listed from late to early):

1. 'Abdallah b. Muhammad al-Hulwani or 'Umar b. Ibrahim al-Muqri - Mukram b. Ahmad - Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Mughallis al-Himmani, or other transmitters.

2. Al-'Abbas b. Ahmad al-Hashimi - Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Miski or Ahmad b. Muhammad

al-Mans.ri (44) - 'All b. Muhammad al-Nakha'i, Ibn

Ka's. 3. Ahmad b. Muhammad al-$ayrafi - 'All b. 'Amr al-Hariri - 'All b.

Muhammad al-Nakha'i, Ibn Ka's. 4. 'Abdallah b. Muhammad al-Asadi - Abo Bakr al-Damaghani -

al-Tahawl. 5. Muhammad b.'Imran al-Marzubani - Ahmad b. Kamil, or other trans-

mitters.

mains in MS, and I have not seen it; but the Fawa 'id, which is a mukhtasar of the Kata 'ib, has been published.

(42) Jawahir, 2:118. (43) 1) Lataif wa-manaqib hisan min akhbar Abi Hanifa al-hibr al-bahr al-Nu 'man,

and 2) Manaqib wa-musnad Abt Hanifa (C. Brockelmann, Geschichte der arabischen Litte- ratur (Leiden 1937-49), Supp., 1:285, 636). The Beirut edition of the Akhbar is based on one of the MSS which Brockelmann lists for the second work, the Manaqib.

(44) Al-Miski and al-Manoari may be two nisbas of the same Ahmad b. Muhammad.

75



NURIT TSAFRIR

6. 'Ali b. al-Hasan al-Razi - Ahmad b. Husayn al-Za'farani - Ahmad b. Abi Khaythama.

7. Al-Husayn b. Haron al-Dabbi - Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Sa'id al- Hamadhani.

The first four isnads are the ones that will concern us here. What distinguishes these isnads is that in each of them, at least one link is a compiler of biographical material on Hanafis. I shall therefore refer to isnads 1-4 as the biographers' isnads. The Akhbar is divided into two parts: the first is about Abo Hanifa, the second about other Hanafis. The discussion which follows is based on an examination of the second part.

About 110, or roughly 70 per cent, of the traditions in the second part of the Akhbar are transmitted by the biographers' isnads. At least four transmitters who appear in these isnads collected or compiled Hanafi biographical material:

1. Ahmad b. al-Salt, who appears in isnad no. 1 as Ahmad b. Muhammad b. Mughallis al-Himmani (d. 308 A.H.), is a good starting point for our discussion: about quarter of the biographers' isnads include him, he is one of the earliest, if not the earliest author of a Hanafi biographical work, and we possess some interesting details about his literary work. Ahmad was a student of the Hanafi Bishr b. al-Walid, who lived in Baghdad and died in 238 A.H. (45). Ahmad lived in the Sharqiyya, the southern part of Baghdad, and transmitted hadiths on the authority of famous scholars of the third century, among whom al-Khatib al-Baghdadi lists al-Fadl b. Dukayn, Bishr b. al-Walid and Abo Bakr b. Abi Shayba. According to the Khatib, the hadiths that Ahmad claims to have transmitted from these scholars are for the most part fabrications produced by Ahmad himself (46). Other scholars also accuse Ahmad b. al-$alt of making up badiths (47). The Khatib adds an important detail: Ahmad compiled traditions about the virtues of Abo Hanifa. The sentence in which this detail is given runs as follows : wa-yabki aycdan 'an Bishr b.

al-.Iarith wa- Yabya b. Ma in wa- Ali b. al-Madini, akhbaranjama'aha ba da an sannafaha ft manaqib Abi HJanifa " and he related also on the authority of Bishr b. al-Harith, Yahya b. Ma'in, and 'Ali b. al-Madini traditions about the virtues of Abo IHanifa which he compiled after he had arranged

(45) Jawabir, 1:174. (46) Ta 'rkh Baghdad, 4:207 (abadith aktharuha batila huwa wada'aha). (47) Dhahabi, Mizan al-i'tidal, 1:140-1 ; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-mtzan, 1:295. According to

these sources, Ahmad b. al-$alt had such a bad reputation that those who transmitted from him tried to conceal this fact by referring to him by a variety of different names. Abmad is indeed known by many names, a fact that makes it difficult to trace him in the isnads. In the Akhbar he appears as Ahmad b. 'Atiyya, Abmad b. Mubammad, Ibn Mughallis, or other com- binations of these names, sometimes including his nisba al-Himmani. In referring to him as Ahmad b. al-$alt I am following al-Khatib al-Baghdadi.

76




them according to subjects "(48). The word sannafaha is perhaps a mis- take for sana'aha " he made them up " (49), for in an acknowledged quotation of this sentence from the Khatib, Ibn Hajar has instead: akhbaran jama'aha ba'da an wada 'aha fi manaqib Abi Hanifa " traditions about the virtues of Abo Hanifa which he compiled after he had fabricated them " (50). Ibn Hajar's variant is not flattering to Ahmad b. al-$alt, but goes well with Ahmad's reputation as a fabricator of fladith. According to both variants Ahmad b. al-$alt compiled a very early collection of manaqib of Abo Hanifa. Al-Daraqutni (d. 385 A.H.) is reported to have testified that he read this compilation several times, and that it consisted entirely of traditions made up by Ahmad (51). A work by Ahmad b. al-$alt entitled Faslfi manaqib Abi Hanifa survives in MS (not seen by me) (52). Works of this kind usually contain material about Hanafi scholars other than Abo Hanifa.

Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi uses two examples to demonstrate the prob- lematic nature of Ahmad's transmission. In one case he questions Ahmad's reliability, in the other he blames him for an interpolation. Both cases have to do with traditions about Abo Hanifa, and they are worth looking at in detail, since they show how pro-Hanafi material was brought into circulation.

Ahmad b. al-$alt transmitted the tradition talab al- 'ilmfarida 'ala kull Muslim "the pursuit of knowledge is incumbent upon every Muslim" with the isnad: Bishr b. al-Walid - Aba Yisuf - Abo Hanifa - Anas b. Malik - the Prophet. For a number of reasons the Khatib views this isnad with suspicion. Nobody except Ahmad is known to have transmitted this hadith from Bishr b. al-Walid; no one remembers that Abo Yfsuf transmitted such a hadith; and it has not been confirmed that Abo Hanifa heard at all from the Sahabi Anas b. Malik. To support his argument the Khatib cites al-Daraqutni, who says that Abn

H. anifa never heard Hadith

from Anas b. Malik, and indeed never met (lam yalbaq) any of the Sababa (53). If al-Khatib is correct in his suspicion, and Ahmad b. al-Salt invented this Hanafi isnad, then Ahmad's purpose in doing so may have been to show that Abn Hanifa transmitted from a Sababi. This interpre- tation of Ahmad's purpose is supported by another hadith transmitted by

(48) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 4:207. (49) As pointed out to me by Ella Landau-Tasseron. (50) Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-mizan, 1:296. (51) Manaqib Abi Hlantfa mawdza'a kulluha wada'aha Ahmad b. al-Mughallis

al-.limmani, qara tuhu ghayr marra (Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-mizan, 1:297). (52) F. Sezgin, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, Leiden 1967,1:410,438 ; my thanks

to Michael Cook for these references. That Abmad's wrote a work on the virtues of Abo Ijanifa is also mentioned by Tamimi in al-Tabaqat al-saniyya, 1:360, and by Hajji Khalifa in his Kashf al-zunan 'an asma' al-kutub wa-al-funan, Istanbul 1360/1941, 2:1837.

(53) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 4:208.

77



NURIT TSAFRIR

him, in which Abo Hanifa is reported to have said that he met, during his performance of the hajj at the age of eighteen, the Sababi 'Abdallah b. al-Harith al-Zubaydi. This report is dismissed as a lie by al-Dhahabi, on the grounds that the Sababi in question died in Egypt when Abo Hanifa was only six years old (54). This and similar hadiths are the product of a controversy between the Hanafis and their adversaries, the question at issue being whether Abo Hanifa transmitted from any of the Sahaba (55). It seems that Ahmad b. al-Salt, as a good Hanafi, sought to demonstrate that he did.

The second case is of an interpolation. Alhmad b. al-Salt appears in an isnad attached to the following report: " Ibn 'Uyayna said: the [most eminent] 'ulama' [were] Ibn 'Abbas [d. 68 A.H.] in his time, al-Sha'bi [d. 104 A.H.] in his time, Abu Hanifa [d. 150 A.H.] in his time, and Sufyan al-Thawri [d. 161 A.H.] in his time " (56). Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi plainly states that it was Ahmad b. al-$alt who added the name of Abo Hanifa to this hadith (57). He supports this statement with two arguments. First, the badith is also transmitted from Ibn 'Uyayna by other isnads, and in these transmissions it opens with the words " the [most eminent] 'ulama' of [all] times are three ", followed only by the names of Ibn 'Abbas, al- Sha'bi and Sufyan al-Thawri. Second, Ibn 'Uyayna is known to have had a poor opinion of Ab HIanifa, and this is incompatible with his placing Abo Hanifa among the great scholars of Islam (58). To these arguments we may add another two: first, in a variant of this hadith, which has a different isnad, the name of Abo Hanifa is replaced by the name of the semi-Hanafi Yahya b. Abi Za'ida (59), and second, Abo Hanifa and Sufyan al-Thawri were contemporaries, and it therefore makes no sense to mention both of them in a hadith that purports to list the most eminent scholar of each generation. All these arguments firmly support the claim that Ahmad b. al-Salt inserted the name of Abo Hanifa into a list of the great scholars which originally included only Ibn 'Abbas, al-Sha'bi and Sufyan al-Thawri.

The conclusion to be drawn from the above seems to be inevitable, and unpleasant for the Hanafis. Ahmad b. al-$alt, the compiler of one of the first Hanafi biographical works, and an important source for later

(54) Dhahabi, Mizan al-i'tidal, 1:141; Ibn Ijajar, Lisan al-mizan, 1:295. (55) These badiths are presented by Makki in a chapter devoted to that question (Manaqib

Abi Ilanifa, 1:27ff). (56) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 4:208; the isnad (from late to early) is: al-$aymarl - 'Abdallah b.

Muhammad al-Hulwani - Mukram b. Ahmad - Ahmad b. al-Salt - Muhammad b. al-Muthanna - Ibn 'Uyayna.

(57) Dhikr Abif Hanifa fi hadhihi al-hikaya ziy da min al-IHimmani (ibid.). (58) Ibid., 208-9. (59) Saymari, Akhbar Abt Hanwfa wa-asbabihi, Beirut 1405/1985, 156.

78




Hanafi literature, was an unreliable transmitter, in whose transmissions Hanafi bias can be discerned.

2. Mukram b. Abmad was a Baghdadi qadi who died in 345 A.H. He appears in about half of the biographers' isnads in the Akhbar, more often than any other transmitter. An important source of Mukram's material is Ahmad b. al-Salt : about half of his transmissions are from Ahmad. We do not know much about Mukram, and about his scholarly activity. Ibn Abi al-Wafa' devotes no space to him in theJawabir, and the Khatib, who grades Mukram as a reliable transmitter, provides only a few details about him (60). But we do know that Mukram b. Ahmad collected traditions about the virtues of Abo

.Hanifa, and also that these traditions came

from Ahmad b. al-Salt. This is to be learnt from an incidental reference preserved by the Khatib, who, in an effort to prove that Ahmad b. al-$alt was not to be relied on, adduces the following : al-Daraqutni, when asked about Mukram b. Ahmad's collection of material concerning the virtues of Abo Hanifa, said that it was all fabrication and lies, made up by Ahmad b. al-$alt (6'). The badiths in the Akhbar suggest that Mukram expanded his Hanafi biographical collection both with traditions which he received from sources other than Ahmad b. al-$alt, and with traditions about Hanafi scholars other than Abo Hanifa. But we do not know how much, if any, of his material Mukram put in writing.

In any event, biographical information about Hanafis evidently began to be gathered as early as the third century by Ahmad b. al-$alt, and Mukram b. Ahmad continued to collect such material in the fourth century. The material they collected, or at least some of it, is preserved in the work of al-$aymari, and is embedded in later works such as the Ta'rikh Baghdad and the Jawahir (62). An earlier attestation of the role of Ahmad b. al-$alt and Mukram b. Ahmad in the transmission of Hanafi material is provided by the Hanafi commentator Abo Bakr al-Ja**as (d. 370 A.H.). In his Abkam al-Q!gr'an, al-Jassas preserved a long anecdote about al-amr bi-al-ma'raf wa-al-nahy 'an al-munkar, involving Abo Hanifa and the Hanafi Ibrahim b. Mayman al-Sa'igh, which he received from Mukram b. Ahmad, who had it from Ahmad b. al-Salt (63).

(60) Tarikbh Baghdad, 13:221. (61) Ta 'rkh Baghdad, 4:209 (su'ila... al-Daraqutni... 'anjam'Mukram b. Ahmadfada il

Abi Hanffa. Fa-qala: mawda' kulluhu kidhb, wada'ahu Ahmad b. al-Mughallis al-Himmand. (62) This material was also handed down to the Khatib by transmitters other than al-Say- marl, which gives some indication of the extent of its circulation. For instance, a hadith indicating that Waki' b. al-Jarrah followed the legal opinions of Abo Hanifa was transmitted to the Khatib from Mukram b. Ahmad through Ibrahim b. Makhlad (d. 410), who was a follower of the legal school of al-Tabari (see page 82 below).

(63) Javas, Ahkam al-Q~ur`an, Cairo 1347, 2:39. I owe this reference to Michael Cook.

79



NURIT TSAFRIR

3. Ibn Ka's, or Ibn Kas, 'All b. Muhammad al-Nakha'i (d. 324 A.H.), is the earliest common link of isnads no. 2 and no. 3 on the list above; the isnads in which he appears (i.e., isnads no. 2 and no. 3, together with some variants of these) form almost a third of the biographers' isnads in the second part of the Akhbar, and about twenty per cent of the total number of isnads in this part. Ibn Ka's was a Hanafi scholar from Ktfa, who for some time lived in Baghdad. He was an expert in Hanafi law, and served as qadi in Damascus and in Ramla (64). Hajji Khalifa notes, in a list of works that deal with the virtues of Abut Hanifa, the name of Ibn Ka's as the author of a book entitled Tuhfat al-sultan fi manaqib al-Nu'man (65). That Ibn Ka's wrote such a book does not seem to be mentioned in other sources, but given the important role of Ibn Ka's in the transmission of Hanafi biographical material, and given the rarity of the name Ibn Ka's, the author referred to by Hajji Khalifa must be our Ibn Ka's, that is, 'All b. Muhammad al-Nakha'i.

4. Al-Tahawi is the earliest common link of the isnads no. 4. These isnads appear about twenty five times in the second part of the Akhbar, and make up almost a quarter of the biographers' isnads, or about fifteen per cent of the total number of isnads in this part. That al-Tahawi wrote a work about the virtues of AbtI Hanifa is reported by Ibn Abi al-Wafa' (66), and this is confirmed by Hajji Khalifa in Kashfal-zuntcn (67). A work by al-Tahawi was available to al-$aymari, and al-$aymari's description of that work as a book in which al-Tahawi " collected traditions about our companions (jama 'a fihi akhbar ahbabina) " (68) suggests that it was a Hanafi biographical work. But I cannot tell if this is identical with the work about the virtues of Abut Hanifa mentioned by Ibn Abi al-Wafa', or another work (69). Ibn Abi al-Wafa' occasionally names al-Tahawi as his source, but he is not necessarily referring to al-Tahawi's work on the virtues of Abo Hanifa: as noted above, at least one other work by al-Tahawi, al-Ta'rikh al-kabir, was a source for Ibn Abi al-Wafa'. Also, references to al-Tahawi in the Jawahir do not necessarily imply that Ibn Abi al-Wafa' borrowed directly from his work. Indirect borrowings

(64) Ta'rtkh Baghdad, 12:70-1; Ibn 'Asakir, Ta'rikh madinat Dimashq, facsimile ed., [Cairo 19891, 12:502-3.

(65) Kashf al-.unan, 2:1838.

(66) Jawahir, 1:277. (67) Kashf al-.zunan,

2:1836-7. (68) Saymari, Akhbar, 37, 66. (69) 'Abd al-Fattah Muhammad al-Hilw, the editor of theJawahir, provides in his intro-

duction to the book a list of the works used by Ibn Abi al-Wafa' in the Jawahir (1:67). Item no. 90 on that list is Kitab al- Tabawtft al-tarajim. In the biography of Asad b. 'Amr, to which al-Hilw refers as an example of the use by Ibn Abi al-Wafa' in the Kitab al-tarajim of al-Tabawl, al-Tabawi is referred to by name, but no book title is mentioned. Al-HIilw may have found a mention of this work by al-Tabawi elsewhere in theJawahir, but he does not say so, and I have not so far found any such mention.

80




through unacknowledged sources occur in the Jawahir, and it may be that Ibn Abi al-Wafa' received through other sources, such as al-$aymari, the information which he credits to al-Tahawi alone. In the Akhbar the informants of al-Tahawi for most of his reports are his two teachers in Egypt, the Baghdadi Ahmad Ibn Abi 'Imran (d. 280 A.H.) and the Bagri Bakkar b. Qutayba (d. 270 A.H.), and the famous Hanafi qadt Abu Khazim (d. 292 A.H.); and there are some hints that the isnads no. 4 transmit Basri tradition (70).

To summarize: Ahmad b. al-Salt, al-Tahawi and probably Ibn Ka's compiled Hanafi biographical works. Mukram may or may have not compiled such work, but he certainly collected Hanafi biographical material, relying in part on Ahmad b. al-Salt's compilation. As to the relationship of transmission between Mukram, Ibn Ka's and al-Tahawi, we find that al-Tabawi's sources were different from those of Ibn Ka's, and that Mukram, who died more than twenty years after al-Tahawi and Ibn Ka's, did not rely on them, but rather on his own sources. Only twice in the Akhbar does Mukram transmit material from either al-Tabhawi or Ibn Ka's. Thus, al-Tahawi, Ibn Ka's and Mukram are three independent sources for the Hanafi material in the Akhbar.

IV. The Sources of the Information on the Hanafi Affiliation of the Semi-Hanafis

Equipped with a better idea about the history of the Hanafi sources, we can now return to the semi-Hanafis, and ask in what sources their connection with the Hanafi school is first mentioned. I have examined for this purpose the biographies of the four semi-Hanafis mentioned above: Haf* b. Ghiyath, Sharik b. 'Abdallah, Yahya b. Abi Za'ida, and Waki' b. al-Jarrah. As far as I can tell, the earliest non-Hanafi source which refers to the Hanafi connection of Haf* b. Ghiyath, Yahya b. Abi Za'ida and Waki' b. al-Jarrab is the Ta'rikh Baghdad. In a report in the entry on Abo Yosuf, Waki' appears as defending of Abo Hanifa against a man who accuses the latter of having erred (akhta'a). How could Abua Hanifa err, Waki' argues, when among his companions were experts in qiyas such as Abo Yusuf and Zufar, experts in fHadith such as Yahya b. Abi Za'ida, Hafs b. Ghiyath, Hibban and Mindil, an expert on the Arabic language such as al-Qasim b. Ma'n, and men as ascetic and pious as Da'ad al-Ta'i and Fudayl b. 'Iyad ? Companions (julasa') of this kind, says Waki',

(70) Information concerning the qad( of Basra 'Isa b. Aban is transmitted in the Akhbar mainly through isnad no. 4, and an episode connected with a visit of Ab Yisuf to Basra is also transmitted by this isnad (147ff and 103 respectively).

81



NURIT TSAFRIR

would certainly have rejected (radda) a man who had erred (71). The third link in the isnad of this report is Ibn Ka's, that is to say, the Khatib received his information about the Hanafi connection of these three semi-Hanafis through a Hanafi source.

The Khatib offers further evidence that Waki' b. al-Jarrabh was a Hanafi: a hadith, found also in Hanafi sources, in which Yahya b. Main is reported to have said that Waki' gavefatwas according to the opinions of Abu Hanifa (72). The Khatib records this tradition on the basis of two isnads, a common link of which is Mukram b. Ahmad (in one isnad the man who transmitted to the Khatib is al-$aymari, in the other it is Ibrahim b. Makhlad, a follower of the legal school of al-Tabari). Again, then, the information about Waki"s ties to the Hanafis was transmitted to the Khatib through a Hanafi. In another place in the Ta 'rkh Baghdad is a report, given only on the authority of the Traditionist Ibn 'Ammar (Muhammad b. 'Abdallah, d. 242 A.H.), which describes Waki' as a follower of the school of the people of Kofa (73). If the school of the people of Kufa refers in this instance to the Hanafi school in particular (and not to the school of Kafa in general, including the Traditionists), then this is further evidence that Waki' was connected to the Hanafi school; but since the isnad of the report is not given, we know nothing of how it was transmitted from Ibn 'Ammar to the Khatib. Thus, of the three traditions about Waki"s connection to the Hanafi school in the Ta'rikh Baghdad, at least two were handed down to the Khatib through Hanafi transmitters.

The case of Yahya b. Abi Za'ida is slightly more complex. That he was a companion of AbIi Hanifa, as appears from the report in the Ta'rikh Baghdad, agrees with the information about him in Hanafi sources. As mentioned above, the Jawahir says that Yahya was one of the companions of Abu Hanifa (74). This information was transmitted to Ibn Abi al- Wafa' through al-Tahawi (75). Al-$aymari, in the entry on Yahya in the Akhbar, provides two other traditions. In one of them it is said that Yabya "was the man who knew more Hadith and had a better knowledge of fiqh than anyone else of his time ", and that he attended the circles both

(71) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 14:247. The report is found also in Saymari, Akhbar, 158-9. (72) Ta 'rkh Baghdad, 13:470; Saymari, Akhbar, 155 ;Jawahir, 3:577; Kardari, 477-8;

Fawa'id, 223. (73) Ta 'rikh Baghdad, 10:243 (wa-kana Waki'yadhhabu madhhab ahl al-Kafa) ; I owe

this reference to Nimrod Hurvitz. (74) See page 70 above. (75) It is transmitted through al-Tabawi with an isnad going back to Asad b. al-Furrat, a

scholar from the Maghrib who traveled to 'Iraq and studied under Hanafi scholars, and who wrote down material transmitted to him by Yahya b. Abi Za'ida (Riyad al-nuffis, 175ff ; Tartab al-madarik, 2:465ff).

82




of Abo Hanifa and of Ibn Abi Layla (76). This tradition was handed down to al-Saymari by isnad no. 3, which includes Ibn Ka's. (The other tradition is also transmitted by isnad no. 3, and is the above-mentioned tradition which names the great Muslim scholars of different generations, with Ahmad b. al-Salt adding the name of Abo Hanifa. Here the added name is rather that of Yahya b. Ibn Abi Za'ida, and the saying is attributed to 'All b. al-Madini instead of Sufyan b. 'Uyayna (7)). That Yahya b. Abi Za'ida was tied to the Hanafi school is thus attested by three different traditions: one in the Ta'rikh Baghdad, one in the Jawahir and one in the Akhbar. All three were transmitted by Hanafis: the traditions in the Ta'rikh Baghdad and in the Akhbar were handed down through Ibn Ka's, the one in theJawahir through al-Tabawi. Ibn Ka's worked in Bagh- dad, al-Tahawi in Egypt, and they transmitted Hanafi material indepen- dently of each other.

That Yahya was affiliated with the Hanafi school is supported also by evidence from a very early non-Hanafi source : Ibn Qutayba (d. 276 A.H.) in his al-Ma 'arif places Yahya among the Murji'is (78).

The Hanafi affiliation of Hafs b. Ghiyath, like that of Yahya, is supported also by a non-Hanafi source, albeit a later one: as mentioned above, al-Shirazi, who was himself a Shafi'i, takes Haf? to be a Hanafi (79).

I have so far found nothing in pre-Jawahir sources that connects Sharik b. 'Abdallah to the Hanafi school, and am unable to suggest what the source was of Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s information on this score. But a nephew of Sharik, Abo Da'ad Sulayman b. 'Amr, is reported to have transmitted masa'il from a work by Abo Hanifa (and is accused of having added fabricated isnads to them) (80). Sulayman is said to have adhered to Jahmi theology, and Ibn al-Murtada, in Tabaqat al-Mu'tazila, ascribes to him Mu'tazili beliefs (81). So although Sharik himself only appears as a Hanafi in Hanafi sources, and is otherwise known to have repudiated both the Hanafis and Murji'I theology, in his close family, albeit in the younger generation, the

.Hanafi school, and the theological ideas its members usu-

ally followed, were certainly favoured.

(76) Saymari, Akhbar, 156. The same tradition appears in Kardari, 486, with the name of Ibn Abi Layla omitted.

(77) Saymari, Akhbar, 156; also in Kardari, 485. (78) Ibn Qutayba, al-Ma'arif, [Cairo] 1960, 625. (79) See page 69 above. (80) J. Van Ess, " Dirar b. 'Amr und die Cahmiya. Biographie einer vergessenen Schule ",

Der Islam 44 (1968), 48. (81) Ibid.

83



NURIT TSAFRIR

V. Conclusion

These examples show that Ibn Abi al-Wafa' was not the first to claim at least three of our four semi-Hanafis for the Hanafi school. They were already described as Hanafis by Hanafi authors of the third and the early fourth centuries, and it was through these authors that al-Khatib al-Baghdadi learnt of the affiliation of the semi-Hanafis with the Hanafi school. The fact that the information which points to the connection of the semi-Hanafis with the Hanafi school came mainly from Hanafi compilations speaks against the reliability of this information, for pro-Hanafi sentiment was, as we have seen, at work in the making of early Hanafi compilations, and affected their contents. On the other hand, it would be premature to conclude that all the evidence of the Hanafi connections of the semi-Hanafis was invented and brought into circulation by early Hanafi authors. Far more reseach would have to be done before such an accusation could be made. In addition to this, the examples examined above also provide some indications that militate against the conclusion that the connections of the semi-Hanafis with the Hanafi school were no more than an invention of pro-Hanafi authors: Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s claim that the semi-Hanafis were connected to the Hanafi school is supported by evidence from a variety of independent sources, and some of these sources are non-Hanafis.

An entirely different reason why Ibn Abi al-Wafa"s presentation of the semi-Hanafis as Hanafis cannot simply be discarded is that in order to refute it, i.e., to argue that the semi-Hanafis were not Hanafis, a clear notion would be needed of what a Hanafi was. But, as noted above, it is not at all certain what the nature of a legal school in the second century was, and what it meant to be a follower of such a school. The example of the Kafi Nab b. Darraj (d. 182 A.H.) illustrates this. Nab is described as a Hanafi by the Khatib: he was sahib ra'y and learntfiqh under Aba Hanifa and Zufar (82). At the same time, however, it appears from the Ta'rikh Baghdad that Nab had his own fiqh (83), and also that he was a companion of Ibn Shubruma (84), the eminent non-Hanafi legal scholar and qadr of Kafa in the first half of the second century. In Waki"s Akhbar al-qudat, on the other hand, it is stated that Nab inclined towards the legal views of Ibn Abi Layla (85), who had his own legal school in Kafa, and in Shi'i sources Nahb appears as an adherent of the Shi'a (86). Nab resembles many other scholars of his time, who are reported to have

(82) Ta'rikh Baghdad, 13:315, 317. (83) Ibid., 316; also in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, 10:430. (84) Ta 'rkh Baghdad, 13:316; also in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, 10:430. (85) Waki', Akhbar al-qudat, 3:182. (86) Kishshi, Rijal, Karbala, n.d., 217; I owe this reference to Etan Kohlberg.

84




followed two or more traditions of legal thought. These scholars may have simultaneously attended circles of more than one teacher, or they may have followed different teachers at different stages of their lives; the sources do not usually clarify this point. In any event, in the second century scholars who followed more than one legal tradition were not uncommon, and this is one way to explain who the semi-Hanafis were: they were those who attended the circles of several teachers, among them Hanafis. The Hanafi connections of the semi-Hanafis were probably sec- ondary to their affiliation with the Traditionist party, and were documented and preserved only by

.Hanafi authors, who were interested in

this detail in particular. Hanafi authors simply stressed the Hanafi aspects of the careers of such scholars, while playing down the non-Hanafi aspects (without always ignoring them entirely).

I believe, in other words, that at least some of the semi-Hanafis really had substantial connections with the

H.anafi school. Furthermore, given

the rapid growth of the Hanafi school during the second century, when many non-Hanafis, including Traditionists, joined the school, the exist- ence of people who belonged to both the Traditionist and the Hanafi parties is hardly surprising. It would have been surprising rather if no echo of the growing influence of the Hanafi school had been preserved in biographical sources. But since biographical literature is dominated by works written by Traditionists, who claimed the semi-Hanafis for their own party, and who generally disliked the Hanafts, the Hanafi features of the semi-Hanafis were at best played down, and at worst neglected entirely. It is therefore only with the help of the information preserved in Hanafi sources that more complete biographies of the semi-Hanafis can be re-constructed. These biographies are an important document of the formative period of the legal schools; they give us a sense of how blurred the lines of demarcation were between the Traditionists and the ahl al-ra'y, the Hanafis, during that period.

Nurit TSAFRIR (Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv)

85



semi-Ḥanafīs and Ḥanafī biographical sources

Documents