Search

Copyright of Journal of the Faculty of Divinity of Ankara University / Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi Dergisi is the property of Ankara Universitesi Ilahiyat Fakultesi Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The claim that Abû Hanîfa (d. 150/767) and Hanafis are weak in hadith and do not give the hadith the necessary importance is made against Hanafi scholars from time to time. The hadith narrations of Abû Hanîfa and his disciples can be considered as a response to such accusations. The hadiths which the Hanafi scholar Bishr b. Walîd al-Kindî (d. 238/853), the student of Abu Yusuf (d. 182/798) who was one of the founders defining the thoughts of Hanafi sect, can be considered as one of these answers. Bishr was a Hanafi scholar who learned and narrated hadith according to science tradition. It has been seen that no study has been done about searching the identity of Bishr as a narrator of hadith and hadiths that he narrated. For this reason, it was thought that it would be useful in terms of serving to Hanafis science of hadith to collect and analyze his narrations. Bishr's narrations are included in some hadith books other than Kutub-i Sitta. In this study, 146 narrations which Bishr got from 34 various scholars and were in the Bishr’s 13 hadith books that were compiled in hijr third and fourth century has been studied in terms of source, isnâd and content. Of the hadiths Bishr transmitted, 134 are Marfu’, nine are Mawquf, and three are Maqtû’. When the Marfu’ narrations are examined according to their subjects, it is understood that approximately two-thirds of the narrations conveyed by Bishr are related to the issues of Ahkâm (laws). His being a faqih is an important factor in the fact that he has many narrations on the subjects of Ahkâm. Very few of the hadiths in the books where Bishr's transmissions are mentioned consist of repetitive narrations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

K. al-Ḥujjah ʿalā ahl al-Madīnah by Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan al-Shaybānī (d. 189/804-5) is a witness to the state of the regional school of Medina before it had been absorbed by (survived only in) the Mālikī personal school. Schacht asserts that each regional school had its characteristic authorities among the Followers, and the Ḥujjah confirms that, sometimes appealing to Kufan Followers against Medinese, sometimes complaining that the Medinese are not staying loyal to their own Medinese Followers. Sometimes also the Ḥujjah testifies to Mālik's pre-eminence among the Medinese of his time, sometimes by appealing to him as 'your faqīh ', with whom the Medinese ought to agree but do not, but mainly as their pre-eminent traditionist. Schacht observed that Shaybānī adduced hadith more often than Abū Yūsuf, and the Ḥujjah often adduces hadith in its arguments against the Medinese. Most often, however, it adduces logical consistency against Medinese positions. Altogether, it suggests that personal schools evolved out of regional by accentuation of the personal element already present in the tradition of regional authorities. By adducing hadith from a wider range of authorities than the Muwaṭṭaʾ , it implicitly argues that Ḥanafi law is superior because it represents the jurisprudence of the whole Empire, not just one centre. Résumé: Le K. al-Ḥujjah ʿalā ahl al-Madīnah de Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan al-Shaybānī (m. 189/804-5) est un témoin de l'état de l'école régionale de Médine avant qu'elle ne soit absorbée par (n'a survécu que dans) l'école personnelle Mālikī. Schacht affirme que chaque école régionale avait ses autorités caractéristiques parmi les adeptes, et le K. al-Ḥujjah le confirme, en faisant appel tantôt aux adeptes de Kufan contre les Médinois tantôt en se plaignant que les Médinois ne restent pas fidèles à leurs propres adeptes médinois. Parfois aussi, le K. al-Ḥujjah témoigne de la prééminence de Mālik parmi les Médinois de son temps, parfois en faisant appel à lui comme "votre faqīh", avec lequel les Médinois devraient être d'accord mais ne le sont pas, en particulier comme leur traditionniste prééminent. Schacht a observé que Shaybānī validait plus souvent des hadiths qu'Abū Yūsuf, et que le K. Ḥujjah adoptait souvent des hadiths dans ses arguments contre les Médinois. Le plus souvent, cependant, il présente la cohérence logique contre les positions médinoises. Dans l'ensemble, il suggère que les écoles personnelles ont évolué à partir des écoles régionales en accentuant l'élément personnel déjà présent dans la tradition des autorités régionales. En présentant des hadiths provenant d'un plus large éventail d'autorités que le Muwaṭṭaʾ , il soutient implicitement que la loi hanafite est supérieure parce qu'elle représente la jurisprudence de tout l'Empire, et non d'un seul centre. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]