Are Hanafis and Matureedis the Same?

Introduction: Who are the Matureediyyah?

Like many of the sects which exist in Islam, their names are often due to what they believed in which was unique to them such as the Jabriyyah being called such because they denied free will and argued all of us are 'forced' with no will of our own. Or they were named according to their founder such as the Jahmiyyah who are named after Jahm ibn Safwan. The Matureediyyah are from this type, i.e. they are named after its founder.

Their Founder

The one to whom this sect is ascribed to is Abu Mansoor Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn Mahmood al-Matureedi as-Samarqandi (d. 333 AH).

He was a follower of the Hanafi school and was known for his intellect and reasoning. He studied various sciences and authored works on creed and refutations against the Mu'tazilah. He was also well-versed in Greek philosophy, as evidenced by his references to its sects and his mention of philosophical views.

Abu al-Hasanat al-Lucknowi in [الفوائد البهية في تراجم الحنفية] said,

"He wrote great works, and refuted the false and wrong views of the misguided sects. He wrote the book 'At-Tawheed', al-Maqalat, Aohaam al-Mu'tazilah, Radd al-Usool al-Khamsa against Abu Muhammad al-Baahili, Radd al-Imamah against some of the Rawafidh, Radd 'Ala al-Qaramitah, and Ma'khaz ash-Shara'i Fi al-Fiqh wa'l Jadl in principles of jurisprudence, and other than that. He died in 333 AH."

It should be noted that the books of history and biographies do not contain great detail on the life of Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi. So let the reader remember that not much is known about him, and he is relatively unknown compared to others. The relevance of this will come later, In sha Allaah.

From the book [أبو منصور الماتريدي حياته وآراؤه العقدية], (pg. 45-47) we see that he learned under Muhammad ibn Muqaatil ar-Razi, Abu Nasr Ahmad ibn al-'Abbas as-Samarqandi, Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Ishaaq al-Jurjaani, And Nasr (or Nusayr) ibn Yahya al-Balkhi.

From [pg. 49], his students were Al-Hakeem as-Samarqandi, Abu al-Hasan ar-Rustughfari, Abu Muhammad 'Abd al-Kareem ibn Moosa al-Bazdawi, 'Abu 'Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abi al-Layth al-Bukhaari and others.

Background of the Sect

The sect emerged in the 4th century AH in the lands beyond the river (Transoxiana). Initially, it was relatively obscure and not known among most scholars of the 4th, 5th, and 6th centuries. It was not mentioned in their books which mentioned the different sects. The sect was not acknowledged by most scholars of these eras either.

The first Ash'ari to mention Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi, and the Matureediyyah was Al-Fakhr al-Raazi (d. 606 AH) in Arba'een Fi Usool ad-Deen (1/277). The first from Ahlus-Sunnah to mention the Matureedis or point to them was Imam Abu Nasr 'Ubaydullaah ibn Sa'eed as-Sijzi al-Hanafi (d. 444 AH) in "Risalah as-Sijzi Ila Ahl az-Zabeed".

Different Stages of Matureediyyah.

Development

This is the stage during which the students of al-Matureedi and those who were influenced by him developed his ideas further, and formed an independent kalami (philosophical) group. The group first appeared in Samarqand, and worked to spread and defend the thought of their shaykh and leader, and wrote books.

Consolidation

The main feature of this stage was prolific writing of books and compiling of evidence on which the Maturidi beliefs were based. Therefore it was the most important stage in terms of consolidating this school of thought.

Expansion and Spread

This is regarded as one of the most important stages, in which the Matureedis reached the peak of their expansion and spread. That was due to the support of the Ottoman sultans. Matureedi dominance spread wherever Ottoman dominance reached. So they spread eastwards and westwards in the Arab lands, India, and the lands of the Turks, Persians and Byzantines, they still have a presence in these lands.

Well-Known Scholars of the Matureedis

Those who spread and taught this sect were many, and some of them wrote books on the Matureediyyah, which caused it to spread among the Hanafis and others.

1. Abu Layth as-Samarqandi (d. 373 or 375 AH)
2. Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi (d. 493 AH)
3. Abu Ishaaq Ibraheem ibn Isma'eel as-Saffaar (d. 534 AH)
4. Abu al-Mu'een an-Nasafi (d. 508 AH)
5. Abu Hafs Umar an-Nasafi (d. 537 AH).
6. Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Ghaznawi (d. 593 AH)
7. Burhaan ad-Deen an-Nasafi (d. 687 AH)
8. Abu al-Barakat an-Nasafi (d. 710 AH)
9. Ibn al-Hummam (d. 861 AH)
10. Mullaah Ali al-Qaari (d. 1014 AH)
11. Mahmood Hasan ad-Deobandi (d. 1339 AH)
12. Muhammad Zaahid al-Kawthari (d. 1339 AH)

Is every Hanafi a Matureedi?

One of the main reasons this question is asked is because a lot of people, especially those online who lack proper knowledge and guidance from Ahlus-Sunnah shaykhs, conflate the madhhab of Imam Abu Haneefah with the sect of the Matureediyyah. This mistake is largly because the Matureedi sect spread among the Hanafis. So they made a blanket statement that every Hanafi was a Matureedi.

They failed to realize that the Hanafis and the Matureedis are quite distinct and the spread of the Matureedis among Hanafis does not make them one and the same. This distinction comes in the fundamental principles and foundations between the imams of the Hanafis and Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi, the originator of this sect.

Likewise, they failed to realize that the Hanafis are a madhhab of Fiqh (jurisprudence) and they are included among the schools of Ahlus-Sunnah. Whereas the matter of the Matureedis is tied to the fundamental principles and foundations of Ahlus-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah. This is unlike the Hanafis whose differences with the other schools are in Furoo' (branches) of the religion, not the fundamentals, since all the madhhaib agree on the major and fundamental parts.

In the book Al-Ghuniyah of imam 'Abd al-Qaadir al-Jeelani al-Hanbali, there is a discussion that revolves around him mentioning the Hanafis as one of the groups of the Murj'iah. The key detail is that he mentioned the Murji'ah as the 'Asl [root] and the Hanafis as the Far' [branch]. It implied that the Hanafis and their principles inherently stemmed from the Murji'ah, and it would necessitate them being from one of the misguided groups.

The scholars debated this in detail and there were two popular approaches to this. The first approach was to deny the attribution of the book to shaykh 'Abd al-Qaadir, or claim that this part was later inserted into his book by someone else. However, we know that the book is authentically attributed, and it is not a later addition as some claimed. The second approach was to understand who was being referred to here.

One of the later Muhaqqiqs, Abu al-Hasaanat al-Lucknawi in [الرفع والتكميل] discussed these two approaches in length. After talking about the first approach, he talks about the second approach. The preferred opinion here was that this referred to the Ghassaniyyah.

The reason for mentioning this discussion here is that one of the answers was that although the Hanafi madhhab is one of the schools of Ahlus-Sunnah, it does not necessarily mean that every Hanafi is a Sunni. There are and have been individuals who although were Hanafi in Furoo', deviated from the Usool of Ahlus-Sunnah. Although the answer was not without its issue (i.e. making the Hanafis the 'Asl and the Murji'ah the Far'), this answer's issue was only in this specific circumstance.

Explaining this view, Al-Lucknawi said:

" The term Hanafiyyah refers to a group that adheres to the teachings of Imam Abu Haneefah in matters of Furoo' (i.e. Fiqh) and follows his methodology in legal practices, whether or not they agree with him in matters of creed. If they align with him in both jurisprudence and creed, they are referred to as "complete Hanafis". If they only follow him in jurisprudence but differ in creed, they are referred to as Hanafis but with a term that indicates their stance in creed."

First: the complete Hanafiyyah. They are people who match Abu Haneefah's creed and Fiqh. From them are names such as Zufar ibn al-Hudhayl, Abu Yoosuf, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, Abu Sulaymaan al-Juzjaani, Ma'lla ibn Mansoor, Hisham ibn 'Ubaydullah al-Raazi, At-Tahaawi, and countless others from the early and late scholars.

Second: the Mu'tazilah from Hanafiyyah. Some names are Muhammad ibn ash-Shujaa', Abu Hashim al-Jubba'i, and others.

Third: the Shi'ah from Hanafiyyah. The example given was that of Al-Hasan ibn Abdullaah, known as Ar-Ra'eesi. He was a Shi'i Baatini, but Hanafi in Fiqh.

Fourth: the Murji'ah from Hanafiyyah. People like Al-Marisi may enter this category.

Fifth: the Jahmiyyah from the Hanafiyyah. People such as Bishr al-Marisi, Ahmad ibn Abi Du'ad come in this category. Imam Ahmad also mentioned in his book [الرد على الزنادقة والجهمية] that some companions of Abu Haneefah took the sayings of Jahm.

The names we have mentioned here can be found in works such as [الجواهر المضية في طبقات الحنفية], [الفوائد البهية في تراجم الحنفية] and [تاج التراجم في طبقات الحنفية].

Thus, it is quite evident that not everyone who claims to be Hanafi is necessarily a Sunni. Rather, whether someone is part of Ahlus-Sunnah or not depends on whether his principles and fundamentals are in line with those of Ahlus-Sunnah.

If it was as they say (i.e. that Hanafis and Matureedis are same), it begs the question why they feel the need to mention them side by side. What we mean is that if being a Matureedi is being a Hanafi and vice versa, then why do they not limit themselves to just being "Hanafi"? They feel at unease with that, they feel the need to expand further on what "Hanafi" is so they say, "I am Hanafi Matureedi". Perhaps this is because on a certain level, they understand that both are not the same thing. Likewise, there are those who say, "We are Hanafi in Fiqh, Matureedi in Aqeedah" or "We follow Abu Haneefah in Fiqh, Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi in Aqeedah". We ask them the same question. if Imam Abu Haneefah is a Matureedi, then why do they not contend themselves with saying they follow Abu Haneefah in both Fiqh and Aqeedah?

Differences between the Hanafis and the Matureedis

Thus, we come to the main focus of this article. The matter of fact is that Imam Abu Haneefah was not a Matureedi. Nor are Hanafis inherently Matureedis. Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him) passed away in 150 AH, while Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi would not be born until 238 AH. Therefore, such a long gap between the Imam and al-Matureedi does not convince the sane person that he could possibly be Matureedi or share his beliefs. The argument against that is although Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi came later, he is the one who elaborated and expanded upon the beliefs and creed of Abu Haneefah, may Allaah have mercy on him. Therefore, it is only fair that we compare the beliefs of Abu Haneefah with the Matureediyyah, and see if they are the same or not. Likewise, we will compare some of the fundamental principles as well.

Note: Despite our own belief that the various books are not attributed to Imam Abu Haneefah, we will be liberal with their usage in this section as a lot of Matureediyyah affirm these books and often quote from them. Some of these books will thus be used by us to argue against them. The reader should keep in mind our points do not come from these books, rather we will use them to reinforce our points from sources the Matureediyyah rely on.

1- Sources of Belief

The Matureediyyah

According to Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi and the Matureediyyah, the base through which the religion is known is reasoning and revelation, as Abu Mansoor stated in his [التوحيد ص ٤].

He said:

"Revelation and reason are the foundations by which religion is known."

There is rational theology [العقليات] which refers to what can be proven by reason, and the texts are secondary to that (meaning reasoning is preferred over the text); that includes the most fundamental and important part of Islam which is Tawheed (the Oneness of Allaah) and that related to it such as the divine attributes. And then there are issues which are mentioned in shar'i texts [السمعيات], these are matters which, on the basis of reason, we may be certain that they are possible, but there is no rational proof to confirm them or otherwise, such as the questioning in the grave, the Meezan, the Siraat etc. Here, the texts are the principle and the reason is secondary to it.

The principle of the Matureediyyah regarding Tawheed is to use reason, with shar'i texts being secondary to that. According to them, reason is definitive in evidence [قطعي] while shar'i texts are conjectural [ظنّي]. This has been mentioned by At-Taftazaani in Sharh al-'Aqaa'id an-Nasafiyyah (pg. 5, 42). Also see: Isharaat al-Maram (pg. 189-199).

This methodology has led them to prefer reason over the revelation when it comes to the fundamental of the religion. So they only accept the shar'i texts if it does not contradict 'reason'.

Abu al-Barakaat an-Nasafi al-Matureedi stated in [الاعتماد في الاعتقاد ص ٤٢٨]:

"Everything that has been transmitted through revelation, and which the intellect does not deem impossible, must be accepted."

In conclusion, when it comes to sources of belief, the Matureediyyah hold both reason and revelation as sources of belief. The most important part of Islam which is to preach the Oneness of Allaah, all that is related to Allaah is rational theology near them, meaning they prefer reason over the texts themselves in such a core matter of Islam.

Abu Haneefah

The matters of the foundations of religion have been clarified by Allaah and His Messenger with a complete clarification that leaves no excuse, for matters of creed are among the greatest things that the Messenger (peace be upon him) conveyed with clear proclamation and explained to the people. Rather, they are the greatest matters by which Allaah established the proof against His servants through the messengers who clarified and conveyed them

And so the Companions followed the revealed word of Allaah, and followed the guidance of the Messenger (peace be upon him) and followed his words and actions. None of them used anything to use as evidence for matters of faith except the Book of God Allaah then the Sunnah of the Messenger (peace be upon him). From it they derived their knowledge about Allaah, the angels, the scriptures, the messengers, the Day of Judgment, and predestination, both good and bad, among other issues that constitute the foundations and pillars of faith, all of which are found in the Quraan and Sunnah. This is the methodology followed by their successors and those after them. The same is the methodology of imam Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him).

Ibn 'Abd al-Barr narrated in al-Intiqa' (pg. 142) from Imam Abu Haneefah that he said:

"I take the Book of Allaah, and if I do not find it there, then I take the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah bless him and grant him peace). If I do not find it in the Book of Allaah nor in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah, then I take the saying of his companions."

And in another narration in Ibid. (pg. 143), he said:

"If it is not found in the Book of Allaah, nor in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace upon him), I look to the statements of his Companions, and I do not leave their opinions for the opinion of others..."

Imam at-Tahaawi in his famous treatsie also reported similar. In this treatsie, he started first by saying:

"This is a clear presentation of the creed of Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jama’ah, according to the way of the jurists of the religion, Abu Haneefah an-Nu’maan ibn Thaabit al-Kufi, Abu Yoosuf Ya’qoob ibn Ibraheem al-Ansaari and Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ash-Shaybani, may Allaah be pleased with them all, and what they believe regarding the fundamentals of the religion and their faith in the Lord of the worlds."

From this treatsie, imam at-Tahaawi has made it clear that the three imams and himself hold the aforementioned sources as the only sources for belief and creed. He said,

"The foundation of Islam is not made firm except with the support of unreserved assent and submission to Allaah."

Ibn Abi al-'Izz al-Hanafi in his explanation stated:

"What he means to say is that Islam is not confirmed for one who does not submit to the words of the two revelations (the Quraan and Sunnah), does not bow to their commands without questioning their wisdom or does not oppose them with one’s one ideas or views. Al-Bukhaari recorded that Imam Muhammad ibn Shihab Az-Zuhri said, 'The message comes from Allaah. It is the responsibility of the Messenger (peace be upon him) to convey the message, and it is encumbent upon us to submit to it.'"

He then says:

"Human reason testifies that the Prophet (peace be upon him) cannot make a mistake when it comes to communicating Allah’s message. It is not permissible for him to make a mistake in that area. Therefore, what he says must be submitted to, accepted completely and put into practice. We know, as an obligation from the religion of Islam, that if a man were to say to the Messenger, “This Quraan that you are reciting to us and the wisdom that you have come with contain lots of things that contradict what we know with our minds. We know with our knowledge your sincerity and honesty by our reasoning. If we accepted everything that you say while it contradicts what our mind says, that would be disparaging our knowledge with which we confirm what you say. Therefore, we believe that there is some contradiction in your words and we turn away from them and do not accept them as guidance or knowledge,” that man would not be a believer in what the Messenger brought and the Messenger would not accept that from him. In fact, if that were permissible, then anyone could disbelieve in anything that the Prophet (peace be upon him) brought. Minds are of different levels and lots of doubts exist. Devils continue to cast suspicions into people. Therefore, everyone could say something like the above concerning what the Prophet (peace be upon him) commanded or said. "

(Relevant to Ibn Abi al-'Izz)

Imam at-Tahaawi also stated:

"We do not speak vainly about Allaah, nor do we argue about the religion of Allaah."

This means we do not argue regarding the essence of Allaah nor do we discuss it, because it is beyond the comprehension of our minds. It also means we do not spread the doubts of the people of innovation by arguing about them, giving them merit.

Ibn Abi al-'Izz said:

This is also a disapproval of the Mutakallimeen and their rejected theology. They go into matters concerning Allaah without any knowledge or authority from Him. Allaah stated:

إِن يَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا ٱلظَّنَّ وَمَا تَهْوَى ٱلْأَنفُسُ ۖ وَلَقَدْ جَآءَهُم مِّن رَّبِّهِمُ ٱلْهُدَىٰٓ

“They follow but a guess and that which they themselves desire, whereas there has surely come to them the Guidance from their Lord!” [53:23].

Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him) has explicitly condemned that one speak about Allaah what He has not spoken about Himself. After stating the above, Ibn Abi al-'Izz quoted from Abu Haneefah:

" No one should say anything about the essence of Allaah, except what He has said of Himself. "

End quote from Sharh al-'Aqeedah at-Tahaawiyyah (pg. 313)

In conclusion, the order of the evidence according to the Imam is as follows: The Book, then the authentic Sunnah, then taking what was reported from the Companions in explaining the issues of religion in general and in the issues of creed in particular, and not going beyond their statements to the statements of others; this is because of their safety from whims and innovations, and the purity of their secrets and intentions, in addition to what they were given in terms of witnessing the revelation and being contemporary with the revelation. Reason has no place in matters of the Unseen, such as that which is related to Allaah (exalted is He).

2- Approach to the Divine Attributes

The Matureediyyah

This point is also intrinsically linked to the previous one. As we established, the Matureediyyah prefer reason over the texts when it comes to Tawheed and the Attributes of Allaah (may He be exalted). Their approach with the Divine Attritubes has two stages: they interpret the intended meaning to some other meaning [التأويل الإجمالي]. After that, they delegate the entire thing to Allaah such as is done with al-Huroof Al-Muqatta'at [التفويض المعنى].

Their reason for this is that the texts which speak about Allaah's attributes are secondary to reason which they consider definitive. But the Quraan is also considered definitive, so they argue that although the Quraan is definitive, the texts regarding those attributes are "conjectural in proof" [ظني الدلالة], thus one must either interpret or delegate the meaning to Allaah in order for it to be accepted. The main reason for this is that they argue these verses and ahadeeth cannot be taken according to what is apparent, because it necessitates anthromorphism which Allaah is far exalted from. Thus, they are left to interpret what is apparent to some other meaning, and delegate it to Allaah.

Al-Murtadha az-Zabeedi was asked about the attributes such as the Descent. He stated:

"And it is answered with a general response, which serves as an introduction to the detailed answers. And that is that the Sharee'ah has established this evidence through reason. If the Sharee'ah were to present something that contradicts reason, and it is evident, both the Sharee'ah and reason would be invalidated together. Given this, we say that every term used in the Sharee'ah which refers to the sacred essence—whether it is an attribute or name, and which contradicts reason—is considered ambiguous. Such terms must either be transmitted massly (mutawatir) or individually (ahad). If the individual report is a text that does not allow for interpretation, we decisively say the reporter has fabricated, made an error, or been mistaken. And If it is apparent, its apparent meaning is not intended. If it is mutawatir, it cannot be a text that does not allow for interpretation; rather, it must be apparent, and any interpretation that reason negates is not intended."

Sa'd ad-Deen At-Taftazaani stated in [شرح المقاصد ج ٤ ص ٥٠] after mentioning verses and ahadeeth about several attributes:

"The answer (to these shar'i texts) is that they are conjectural texts in opposition to definitive rational proofs. Hence, it is concluded that they are not to be taken on the apparent, and the understanding of their meanings is entrusted to Allaah, while maintaining belief in their truth."

Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi said in [تفسير الماتريدي ج ١ ص ٧٣] regarding the second approach:

"The second [approach] is that the wording may bear meanings which render the speech concise and abbreviated, while sufficing with places of understanding in those contexts instead of fully elaborating the explanation."

In his book [التوحيد ص ٧٤], the reason they go to other meanings and not the apparent one:

"It may be understood, from what is observable in common usage, that the expressions upon (ʿalā), al-Arsh, and ‘istiwāʾ’ can carry various meanings. Therefore, it is not permissible to direct them toward the harshest or most crude meaning when there is room for a better and more appropriate interpretation."

So according to them, the apparent meaning is "the harshest and most crude", and the apparent meaning "necessitates it being likened to Allaah", Subhan'Allaah.

In conclusion, the Matureedis' approach to the Divine Attributes is to interpret the apparent meaning away towards meanings not intended by the text. Adding onto that, they also delegate the entire meaning to Allaah, like it is done with al-Huroof al-Mutaqatta'at where they say no one knows its meanings except Allaah.

Though a contradiction does arise here. If they claim that the meaning is only known to Allaah, then how can they deny the apparent meaning, and say "it is not the intended meaning"? They just stated only Allaah knows the meaning! Likewise, the two approaches do not complement each other. If only Allaah knows the meaning, then why do they advocate for interpretation of these attributes to some other meaning? It would have been fine to say that these could be correct meanings but the true meaning is only known to Allaah, but that is not the case. They say the meaning is only known to Allaah, and the meaning is also what they interpret it to be.

Abu Haneefah

Imam Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him) as we have quoted in the previous section does not adhere to the same principles as the Matureedis. So his approach is the same as the approach of Ahlus-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah which is to accept the intended meaning of the text without denying it [التعتيل], interpretating it [التاويل], asking 'how' [التكيف], or to liken the meaning with the creaion [التمثيل]. We established this already using the texts from the first section which point to this.

In addition to all that, in al-Fiqh al-Akbar, Abu Haneefah says:

"And He has a hand, a face, a being, like how Allaah has mentioned in the Quraan from the mention of the face, the hand, the being, and they are His attributes without a how. And it is not said, 'his hand is his power or blessing', because there is denial of the attribute in it, and it is the saying of the Qadariyyah, and Mu'tazilah. Rather His hand is His attribute without a how, and His anger and pleasure are two attributes from the attributes of Allaah without a how."

In the book al-Fiqh al-Absat, Abu Haneefah states:

"Allaah, the most High, is not attributed with the attributes of the creation. His anger and His pleasure are two attributes of His without a how, and that is the view of Ahlus Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah. He becomes angry and He becomes pleased, and it is not to be said that His anger means His Punishment, or that His pleasure means His reward. We describe Him as He has described Himself."

In the book Aqeedah as-Salaf wa As-hab al-Hadeeth, Imam as-Saabooni narrated from Abu Haneefah regarding the Descent of Allaah in the last part of the night:

"He descends without a how."

This is how the two Companions Abu Yoosuf and Muhammad were also like. Abu Yoosuf said:

"And Allaah has commanded you to believe in everything brought by His Prophet (peace be upon him). He said:

Say: O mankind, indeed I am the Messenger of Allah to you all — [from Him] to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. There is no deity except Him; He gives life and causes death. So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, who believes in Allah and His words, and follow him so that you may be guided. [Quraan, Sūrah al-Aʿrāf 7:158]

"Thus, Allaah has commanded you to be one who follows, listens, and obeys.”

End quote from [الحجة في بيان المحجة ص٣٢١]

Shaddad ibn Hakeem said, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan was asked about the Descent. So he replied:

"The narrations that state that Allaah descends to the lowest heaven, and similar, have been narrated by the trustworthy. We narrate them, believe in them, and do not explain them [i.e. explain them how the misguided sects do]."

Narrated by Al-Laalikaai in [ شرح أصول اعتقاد أهل السنة رقم ((٧٤١)) ٣/٤٣٣]. This was also mentioned by Ibn Qudamah al-Hanbali in [ إثبات صفة العلو رقم ((٨٢)) ص١٧٠] and Adh-Dhahabi in [العلو ص١١٣]

Al-Laalikaai also narrated in [شرح أصول أهل السنة والجماعة ٣/٤٣٢-٤٣٣] from him:

"All scholars, from east to west, agree that belief in the Quraan and the Ahadeeth transmitted by trustworthy narrators from the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him), regarding the attributes of the Lord, the Almighty and Majestic, is without altering, describing, or likening Him (to the creation)."

In conclusion, the approach of Imam Abu Haneefah regarding the Divine Attributes was to accept the apparent meaning without delving into the 'howness' of the attributes. He also denounced the ways of the Matureedis by condemning their going towards interpretation (ta'weel). This is explicitly said by him in al-Fiqh al-Akbar, and indirectly included in the treatsie of imam at-Tahaawi.

3- 'Ilm al-Kalaam (Theological Rhetoric)

The Matureediyyah

According to the Matureediyyah, al-Kalam is defined as:

"Al-Kalaam. it is knowledge in the religious beliefs with definitive evidences."

From [شرح المقاصد للتفتازاني].

At-Taftazaani also said about it in Sharh al-Aqaa'id (pg. 2-3):

“For the foundation of the knowledge of the laws and rulings, and the basis of the principles of Islam, is the knowledge of Tawheed and the attributes (of Allaah), known as 'Ilm al-Kalaam which saves from the depths of doubts and the darkness of illusions.”

The vast majority of the Matureedis spent their lives and exhausted their efforts in al-Kalam, studying it and teaching it, such as Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi, Abu al-Mu'een an-Nasafi, Noor ad-Deen as-Sabooni, Najm ad-Deen an-Nasafi, Haafidh ad-Deen an-Nasafi, At-Taftazaani (he is Ash'ari but wrote about the Matureedis and explained their doctrine), Al-Jurjaani, Al-Bayaadhi, al-Farhari and others. They spent time on it so much such that parts of al-Kalam even creeped into their books of Usool and Qawaa'id. And parts of that ended up being adopted unknowingly by many Fuqaha', may Allaah forigve them. This also occurred in the works of the madhhab of Ash-Shaafi'i and Maalik due to the Ash'aris..

Al-Matureedi himself has also written extensively on al-Kalam, philosophy and logic. His works such as "At-Tawheed", and "Ta'weelaat Ahlus-Sunnah" [Quoted in this article as 'Tafseer al-Matureedi'] are full of those things, devoid of the Quraan and Sunnah.

Unlike other places, the Matureedis have acknowledged that al-Kalam was not something Abu Haneefah taught, and that he openly forbade people from delving into it. Despite that, some of them were misled due to the falsely attributed works such as al-Aalim wa'l Muta'allim, and some of them continued to engage in it, despite knowing of the Imam's prohibition on it.

This prohibition was not limited to the Imam either, but rather many of the Hanafi jurists and scholars prohibited al-Kalam. Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi in his [أصول الدين] stated:

On learning Al-Kalam, teaching it, and writing about it

"The scholars differed regarding learning the science of kalām, teaching it, and authoring works in it."

"Some of them said: all of that is permissible. This is the view of the majority of the Mutakallimeen among Ahlus-Sunnah wa’l-Jamāʿah [He means the Matureedis]. It is also the view of the Ashʿaris and the Muʿtazilah."

"And some scholars said: none of that is permissible. This is the view of the majority of the Hadeeth scholars."

"And the science of al-Kalam concerning which they differed in learning, teaching, and writing is: the explanation of the issues that are the foundations of the religion, the learning of which is individually obligatory."

"And Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him) used to study this science and debate it with the Muʿtazilah and with all the people of innovation. He used to teach his students at the beginning stages, and he authored books on it, some of which have reached us. Most of them were erased and washed away by the people of innovation and deviation. What has reached us includes Kitab al-Aalim wa’l-Mutaʿallim and al-Fiqh al-Akbar." And he explicitly stated in Kitab al-Aalim wa’l-Mutaʿallim that there is no harm in learning this science. He said:

"The student said: I saw people saying: 'Do not enter into these matters, for the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him), may Allaah be pleased with them all, id not enter into anything of these matters, so what sufficed them should suffice you.'' He said: The scholar replied: 'Tell them: Yes, what sufficed them would suffice me if I were in their position, and if I did not have what they had in front of them. But we have been afflicted by those who attack us and deem our blood lawful, so it is not sufficient for us that we do not know who among us is mistaken and who is correct. The example of the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him)is like a people who have no one fighting them in front of them, so they do not need to carry weapons; whereas we have been afflicted by those who fight us, so weapons are necessary.'"

"And most of our jurists and imams in our lands have forbidden people from learning this science openly, and from teaching it, and from debating it. And if we do not teach it, on the pretext that there is disagreement among jurists regarding issues of Tawheed, then some doctrines of the people of innovation will become apparent."

"And we follow Abu Haneefah, for he is our imam and example in principles and branches. He permitted teaching it, learning it, and writing on it. However, in his later life he refrained from debate in it and forbade his companions from debating it, and he would not teach it to his students openly as he taught fiqh, which consists of practical legal rulings."

Thus, we see from the Matureedis that they acknowledged that the majority of the scholars from our madhhab [at the time of al-Bazdawi and prior] and others, including all of the companions [as implied from the alleged text in al-Aalim wa'l Muta'allim], prohibited the people from al-Kalam, and they did not engage in it. They also acknowledge that the Imam also gave it up.

However, as we established, the book "al-Aalim wa'l Muta'allim" is not authentically attributed to imam Abu Haneefah, thus it is not correct to attribute permissibility of learning, teaching and spreading al-Kalam to Imam Abu Haneefah. We have no authentic texts from him stating so. More so, this contradicts what is well known from his biography that the Imam did not have a teaching circle for Al-Kalam. Rather, he would not sit with the scholars at all until a woman came and asked him about a legal matter which he did not know the answer of. So he told her to go and ask Hammad, and inform him about the answer. Once she got her answer and informed Abu Haneefah, he stated, "I have no need for al-Kalam", took his sandals, and went to the cirle of Hammad ibn Abi Sulaymaan (may Allaah have mercy on him).

Thus in conclusion, Al-Kalam according to the Matureedis is the most fundamental and important science, some of them said it is obligatory on every individual to know and learn. According to them, al-Kalam is defending the religion from doubts and evil through detailed evidences, and they liken this to Fiqh (learning the practical matters through detailed evidences). That is why they also called al-Kalam "Al-Fiqh al-Akbar".

Abu Haneefah

Al-Kalam near Ahlus-Sunnah is not defined as the Mutakallimeen defined it as.

Its definition came in [(1/15) الموسوعة العقدية للدرر السنية]: “The science of al-Kalam: It is a science by which one is able to argue about beliefs and debate them, by presenting arguments and doubts, and refuting the objections of opponents; so it is, in short, the science of creedal argumentation that is condemned by Sharee'ah, as it is a dispute related to proving the doctrines and making them victorious.”

As we noted about the biography of imam Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him), he used to engage in 'Ilm al-Kalaam, but he left it later on, and prohibited from engaging in it. One thing that should be considered are the words of Abu Haneefah, "I have no need for al-Kalam". This indicates and is against the belief of the Matureedis that 'Ilm al-Kalaam is an obligation and the most important science. How could imam Abu Haneefah say there is no need for such a science if it truly were an obligation and the most important science? The Matureedis rely on this science to argue for Tawheed (Oneness of Allaah) and defending the religion, yet the Imam dismisses it! The implications are clear.

We will present narrations from the Imam and some of his close students, as well as some later scholars who denounced 'Ilm al-Kalaam and relying on it.

When imam Abu Haneefah turned away from al-Kalam, he reflected on it and decided against it. In [مناقب أبي حنيفة للكردري ص١٣٧، ١٣٨], he said:

"Then, after a period of my life had passed, I reflected and said: The Salaf were more knowledgeable of the truths of matters, yet they did not delve themselves in argumentation. Rather, they refrained from it and occupied themselves with the knowledge of the Shar'eeah. They desired it, taught it, learned it, and debated concerning it.

"So I abandoned al-Kalam and devoted myself to fiqh. I saw those occupied with kalām, and their appearance was not the appearance of the righteous: their hearts were hard and their dispositions harsh. They did not care about opposing the Book, the Sunnah, and the righteous Salaf. Had it been good, the righteous Salaf would have occupied themselves with it"

It is also reported in [مناقب أبي حنيفة للمكي ص١٨٣، ١٨٤] from Hammad ibn Abi Haneefah:

"One day my father, may Allaah have mercy on him, came to me while I had a group of the people of al-Kalam with me, and we were debating a certain issue. Our voices had become loud. When I heard him enter the house, I went out to him. He said to me, 'O Hammad, who is with you?' I replied: ‘So-and-so, so-and-so, and so-and-so,’ naming those who were with me. He said: ‘And what are you discussing?’ I said: ‘Such-and-such a matter.’ He then said to me: ‘O Hammad, leave al-Kalam.’ He said — and I had never known my father to be confused in judgment, nor to command something and then later forbid it — so I said to him: ‘O father, did you not use to command me to engage in it?’ He replied: ‘Yes, my son, but today I forbid you from it.’ I asked: ‘Why is that?’ He said: ‘My son, these people who debate in the various subjects of Al-Kalam whom you see were once upon one statement and one religion, until Shaytaan sowed discord among them and cast enmity and disagreement between them, so they became divided…"

In [ذم الكلام وأهله] and [الحجة في بيان المحجة], it is narrated that Nooh al-Jaami said: I said to Abu Haneefah, what do you say about nonessential characteristics and bodies? So he replied:

"Terms of the philosophers! Upon you is the way of the Salaf, and beware of every newly created matter, for it is an innovation."

So Imam Abu Haneefah, may Allaah have mercy on him, used to instruct those who asked him about al-Kalam to follow the traditions and the way of the Salaf, and he would forbid them from new matters.

The one who opened al-Kalam to the people was a man named 'Amr ibn 'Ubayd. Al-Harawi in [ذم الكلام وأهله] reported from Muhammad ibn al-Hasan that Abu Haneefah said:

"May Allaah curse Amr ibn Ubayd, for he opened the way for people towards al-Kalam in matters that do not concern them."

And he reported from Imam Muhammad through another route:

"And Abu Haneefah used to urge us to study jurisprudence and forbid us from al-Kalam".

In [مناقب أبي حنيفة للمكي ص٣٧٣] that Abu Haneefah said to imam Abu Yoosuf:

“Beware that you talk to the common people about the fundamentals of religion from al-Kalam, for they are a people who follow you and become preoccupied with that.”

So pay attention to this, imam Abu Haneefah warns Abu Yoosuf on mentioning the issues of al-Kalam to the common people, yet the Matureedis believe it is an obligation to learn it and teach it. Rather, they call the common people as sinful for not learning this science and being neglectful of it.

Imam Abu Yoosuf is one of those who were severely against 'Ilm al-Kalaam. Al-Qaadhi Wakee' in [أخبار القضاة] narrated from him with a Saheeh chain:

"Whoever seeks the religion through al-Kalam is a heretical apostate."

It is also reported in [ المحيط البرهاني ج ١ ص ٤٠٦] that Abu Yoosuf said:

"Prayer behind a Mutakallim (one who speaks with al-Kalaam) is not permissible, even if he is speaking the truth, because it is an innovation, and prayer behind an innovator is not permissible."

The admonitions of Imam Abu Yoosuf to Bishr al-Marisi are also well known. Bishr al-Marisi used to sit with Imam Abu Yoosuf, and he learned Fiqh from him. But after he delved into 'Ilm al-Kalaam, and developed his beliefs which were against the Salaf, Abu Yoosuf would frequently admonish him due to what he started to say and how he started to act.

'Abdullah ibn al-Imam Ahmad in [السنة برقم ١٨٩] said, I heard my father say:

"We used to attend the gathering of Abu Yoosuf, and Bishr Al-Marisi would also attend as the last of people and he would make trouble and say: 'What do you say, and what did you say O Abu Yoosuf?' And he would continue to be noisy and shout, and I used to hear Abu Yoosuf say: 'Bring him up here to me, bring him up here to me.' He (I.e Imam Ahmad) said: So a day came and he did the same, so Abu Yoouf said: 'Bring him up here to me.' My father said: And I was close to him, and he began to debate him regarding an issue. But some of what he said was hidden from me, so I said to the one who was closer than me: 'What did Abu Yoosuf say to him?' So he said: He said to him: 'You will not stop until you are crucified.'"

Specifically regarding his admonition in al-Kalam, then Ad-Darimi in [نقض الدارمي على المريسي], Al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi in [تاريخ بغداد], and Ibn Battah in [الإبانة الكبرى"] all narrated from him:

"Knowledge of al-Kalaam is ignorance, and ignorance of al-Kalaam is knowledge. And if he becomes a leader in al-Kalam, he is called a heretic, or accused of heresy. O Bishr, it has reached me that you speak about the Quraan (i.e. say that it is created). If you acknowledge Allaah's knowledge, you will be refuted; but if you deny His knowledge, you have disbelieved."

Abu 'Abd ar-Rahmaan as-Sulami said, I saw in the writing of Abu 'Amr ibn Matar, Muhammad ibn Ishaaq ibn Khuzaymah (d. 311 AH) was asked about al-Kalaam in the names and attributes of Allaah, so he replied:

"It is an innovation they introduced, and the leading scholars of the Muslims from among the Companions, the Tabi'een and the imams of the religion and masters of the madhhaib, such as Maalik ibn Anas, Sufyaan ath-Thawri, Al-Awzaa'i, Ash-Shaafi'i, Abu Haneefah, Abu Yoosuf, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ishaaq ibn Rahawayh, Yahya ibn Yahya al-Laythi, Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, and Muhammad ibn Yahya, did not engage in such discussions. Rather, they forbade delving into it and directed their companions to the Book and the Sunnah."

End quote from [أحاديث في ذم الكلام وأهله]

What we have quoted should suffice, however we will add another supporting narration, which is only for emphasis, not as way of proving our point. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr reported in [جامع بيان العلم وفضله]:

From Muhammad ibn Shuja' al-Balkhi who said, I heard Al-Hasan ibn Ziyad al-Lu'lu'i, and a man said to him regarding Zufar ibn al-Huthayl: "Did he engange in al-Kalaam?" So he replied, "May Allaah be exalted! How foolish you are. I never encountered our shaykhs, Zufar, Abu Yoosuf, Abu Haneefah, and those with whom we sat and from whom we learned, being concerned with anything other than Fiqh and following those who came before them."

The reason we have only mentioned this for emphasis is because of Muhammad ibn Shuja' al-Balkhi, who is Ath-Thalji al-Baghdadi. He was accused of fabricating narrations on anthropomorphism and attributing them to Ahlus-Sunnah. That is because he was one of the Jahmiyyah who believed in Waqf of the Quraan (i.e. Not saying it is created, nor saying it is uncreated). Imam 'Uthman ibn Sa'eed ad-Darimi wrote a refutation on him and his companion Bishr al-Marisi.

In al-Fawaa'id al-Bahiyyah, Abu al-Hasanaat al-Lucknawi answered this accusation [of fabricating narrations on anthropomorphism and attributing them to Ahl al-Hadeeth] by arguing that he had a book titled "Ar-Radd 'Ala al-Mushabbihah" so why would he do what he was accused of. However, this answer is not appropriate. The Jahmiyyah, especially Bishr al-Marisi and their ilk accused the Sunnis of anthropomorphism due to their belief in accepting the texts and narrations regarding the names and attributes of Allaah on their apparent nature, even though this is not anthropomorphism in truth. However, the Jahmiyyah, Mu'tazilah, and all the other Ahlul-Kalaam sects argue that accepting them on its apparent meaning is anthropomorphism. We have quoted some of the Matureedis on that in the first section. Thus, the mere name of the book is not enough to dispel this accusation.

Other than that, prohibition of prohibit al-Kalaam, learning it and teaching it, is found from the jurists of the madhhab, and it is well known from the early scholars as well. We quoted Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi and his mentioning that most of the jurist and imams prohibited al-Kalaam. The same is narrated from others. For instance, it is reported from Imam Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Moosa al-Khwarezmi al-Hanafi (d. 403 AH) in [تاريخ بغداد]:

"Our religion is the religion of old women (i.e. what the previous generations or 'old' ones held), and we have nothing to do with Al-Kalaam."

In [درر الحكام شرح غرر الأحكام]:

"Qadi Khan al-Hanafi (d. 592 AH) said: A man who goes out to seek knowledge without his parents' permission is not at fault and is not considered disobedience."

Mullah Khusrow al-Hanafi (d. 885 AH) explained: "And what he meant by knowledge is religious knowledge and what is beneficial in it, not 'Ilm al-Kalaam and the like, because of what was narrated on the authority of Imam Ash-Shaafi’i - may Allaah have mercy on him - that he said: It is better for a servant to meet Allaah with the greatest of sins than to meet Him with the knowledge of al-Kalam. If this was the state of al-Kalam prevalent in their time, what do you think of al-Kalam mixed with the ravings of philosophers, buried among their embellished falsehoods!?

Al-Haafidh Abu al-Layth as-Samarqandi al-Hanafi stated as recorded in [الجواهر المضية فى طبقات الحنفية]:

"Whoever occupies himself with al-Kalam, his name will be struck from the scholars."

This is al-Haafidh Abu al-Layth as-Samarqandi who died in 294 AH. He is different from the Abu al-Layth as-Samarqandi mentioned among the scholars of the Matureediyyah, he is nicknamed al-Faqeeh, and this Abu al-Layth is nicknamed al-Haafidh.

It is reported from Abu al-Qaasim as-Saffar al-Hanafi (d. 326 AH), who is from the ranks of al-Karkhi:

"In al-Khaniyyah: On the authority of some virtuous people: A man bequeathed that his books, if they are not boosk of knowledge, then it should be sold, and that the books of knowledge be preserved. So his books were examined, and among them were books of Al-Kalaam. So they wrote to Abu al-Qaasim as-Saffaar, and he wrote that the books of al-Kalaam should be sold, because they are not books of knowledge."

End quote from [البحر الرائق]

Shams al-'Aimmah al-Halwaani (d. 449-450 AH) who was the scholar of Bukhara - in which the Hanafi leadership in it belonged to him in his time - stated:

In al-Khulasah, from al-Halwani: It is forbidden to pray behind someone who engages in al-Kalaam and debates with innovators. In al-Mujtaba, this was interpreted as referring to one who debates with the intention of causing his opponent to slip and err."

Mullah 'Ali al-Qari said, "It seems he based it on what was narrated from Abu Yoosuf, who said: It is not permissible to pray behind the Mutakallim, even if he speaks the truth."

End quote from [البحر الرائق] and [فتح باب العناية بشرح النقاية].

After this, Ibn Nujaym then said:

"In al-Mujtaba, this applies to someone who intends to mislead his opponent through debate. However, if someone intends to guide others to the truth and lead them to righteousness, then he is among those whose example is a blessing, and through his guidance and being guided, calamities are averted from humanity."

The main problem here is that the book being quoted is 'al-Mujtaba Sharh al-Qudoori' which is considered one of the unreliable books in the madhhab. It has been mentioned by the scholars that its author Mukhtaar ibn Mahmood az-Zaahidi was a Mu'tazili though Hanafi in Furoo'. Thus it makes sense for him to try and interpret these sayings which denounce 'Ilm al-Kalaam to something away from what is apparent since the Mu'tazilah are one of the Ahlul-Kalaam sects. It is mentioned his writings are not considered valid unless they are found to be in agreement with others. (Source)

As for Mullah 'Ali al-Qari, he stated further:

"Al-Hinduwani said: It is possible that what he meant was someone who debates the intricacies of Al-Kalaam."

While it is indeed possible, we have already established that Imam Abu Yoosuf, as well as Muhammad, Abu Haneefah, and others prohibited 'Ilm al-Kalaam without any exceptions. Their words are general [العام] thus they should be taken generally as well. So it is said, this includes all aspects of 'Ilm al-Kalaam, including intricacies of it. If one argues for its restriction, or trying to specify them, then they should bring proof in support of it.

Muhamamd ibn Abi Bakr al-Mar'ashi al-Hanafi, known as Saajqali Zadah (d. 1145) was one who studied 'Ilm al-Kalaam in great detail, and he even authored the well-known work, 'نشر الطوالع'. He stated in [ترتيب العلوم]:

"I say: just as al-Ghazaali abandoned al-Kalaam, I too abandoned it, dissociated myself from it, and repented from it to Allaah, the most High, Who accepts repentance from His servants and pardons sins. I ask Allaah not to resurrect me on the Day of Resurrection among the Mutakallimeen. I say this after having occupied myself with al-Kalaam and authored works in it, (like) Nashr at-Tawaliʿ. Now I wish I could gather all the distributed copies of it and burn them in the fire so that no trace of me would remain in al-Kalaam, but I am unable to do so."

He said further:

Chapter Three: On the Condemnation of Delving Deep into 'Ilm al-Kalaam

"Among the works written on certain issues of al-Kalaam is Risalat Ithbaat al-Waajib by ad-Dawwani. It has a commentary, and also a marginal gloss upon that commentary, with which some students occupy themselves in study for about a year — even though its entire subject matter is only a single issue: that the universe has a god whose existence is necessary. Yet it contains long and weak proofs and extensive arguments. Engaging in it produces nothing but the weakening of one’s creed and the introduction of destructive doubts."

Thus, in conclusion to this long section, we firmly establish that Imam Abu Haneefah, his immediate students, and most of the imams and jurists of the madhhab prohibited 'Ilm al-Kalaam. Those scholars who argued for its permissibility from the Hanafis were either those who were affected by some sayings of the Mutakallimeen, or the Matureedis, who as we have also established depend on 'Ilm al-Kalaam for their entire sect would not exist, if not for this destructive "science". We ask Allaah for safety from the trap and misguidance of the Ahlul-Kalaam. I would like to end this section by quoting two transmissions of consensus [الإجماع] from the Salaf on the prohibition of 'Ilm al-Kalaam.

1- Ibn 'Abd al-Barr (d. 463 AH) in [جامع بيان العلم وفضله]

“The people of al-Fiqh and al-Aathar (i.e. scholars) from all the regions have unanimously agreed that the people of Al-Kalaam are people of innovation and misguidance. According to all of them, they are not counted among the ranks of the jurists."

2- Muhiyy as-Sunnah al-Baghawi (d. 516 AH) in [شرح السنة]

"The scholars of the Salaf from Ahlus-Sunnah unanimously agreed upon prohibiting disputes and arguments concerning the Divine Attributes, and on engaging in and learning 'Ilm al-Kalaam."

4- Belief in the Speech of Allaah

The Matureediyyah

According to Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi and the Matureediyyah, the speech of Allaah is one of His attributes that are established in His Self which has always existed. They divided the speech of Allaah into two parts: Al-Kalam an-Nafsi (inner speech) and al-Kalam al-Lafdhi (verbal speech).

According to Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi in [أصول الدين ص ٦١], inner speech is defined as:

"That which exists by Allaah is one thing, without parts, without number, without end, and without beginning."

Abu al-Mu'een an-Nasafi in [تبصرة الادلة] explained:

"It is the meaning inherent in the speaker's mind, the meaning that the speaker conceives and expresses through these words composed of letters." And he said, "It is the meaning inherent in the self, but these expressions are called speech because they indicate speech."

So when the Matureedis say the Speech of Allaah is not created, they intend by it this 'inner speech'. And when that inner speech is expressed, then that becomes verbal speech which is created. Near them, When the 'inner speech' is expressed in Arabic, it becomes the Quraan. When it is expressed in Hebrew, it becomes the Taurah, and so on. They say that the expressions may differ, but not the words themselves. This was stated by them such as by Az-Zabeedi in [شرح الإحياء ٢/ ٣٠ - ٣١، ١٤٤، ١٤٥] and al-Bazdawi in [أصول الدين ص ٦١].

Therefore, according to this belief, they believe that the Quraan which is in Arabic and was revealed upon the Prophet (peace be upon him) is created, and not the speech of Allaah. They say its words and its meaning are created. This has been stated by almost all Matureedi authorities, such as

• Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi in [التوحيد ص ٥٩]
• Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi in [أصول الدين ص ٦١]
• Abu al-Mu'een an-Nasafi in [تبصرة الأدلة] and [التمهيد]
• Al-Jurjaani in [شرح المواقف ٨/ ٩٣، ٩٥، ٩٩]
• At-Taftazaani in [شرح العقائد النسفية ص ٥٨ - ٦١]

Abu al-Mu'een stated in his explanation in [تبصرة الأدلة] regarding the Quraan we have in our hands today:

"And these expressions are called the Qur’an and the Speech of Allaah because the Speech of Allaah Most High is conveyed through them. Yet they themselves are created, whereas the speech which is an attribute of Allaah Most High is not created."

Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi said in [أصول الدين ص ٦٠ - ٦١] that the Quraan which is in our hands today is only called "speech of Allaah" figuratively and that it is not actually the speech of Allaah [in reality].

They also say the speech of Allaah does not have letters and sounds. Rather, that Allaah creates the letters and sounds which Jibreel then heard, and conveyed it to the Prophet (peace be upon him). They also said Moosa did not hear the speech of Allaah, rather that Allaah created what was in His inner speech, and the tree was the vessel where Allaah created that speech which Moosa heard. See: [بحر الكلام ص٢٩]

Abu al-Barakaat an-Nasafi in [الاعتماد في الاعتقاد ص ١٩٢] quoted from Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi:

"His (i.e. Allaah's) speech cannot be heard as it is impossible to hear something that is not a sound."

The final aspect to this is that the Matureedis prohibit that someone says "The Quraan is uncreated", lest someone think that these words and meanings are the speech of Allaah. So they argue that one must say, "The Quraan is the speech of Allaah which is uncreated." So thet divert the uncreatedness to the speech, rather than to the Quraan. See An-Nasafi's [تبصرة الأدلة] and At-Taftazaani in [شرح العقائد النسفية ص ٥٩ - ٦٠]

To simply all this for the reader. According to the Matureedis, the speech of Allaah which is His attribute is eternal, and that He has always been speaking. They say His speech consists of an idea subsisting in His self. They do not say that Allaah speaks, that His speech has a sound, or that His speech has letters. They say that all revelations of Allaah which are considered His speech are not His speech in reality, but only figuratively His speech as they covney what He intended in Himself. The Quraan which we recite, memorize and is found in the masaahif is not the uncreated speech of Allaah. Its words, letters and meaning are all created. Therefore it is not correct to say the Quraan is uncreated.

I add onto this, that the only difference between the Matureedis and Mu'tazilah regarding the Quraan is that the Mu'tazilah did not differentiate between al-Kalam al-Lafdhi and al-Kalam an-Nafsi. Rather, they said all of it is the speech of Allaah, and it is created. The Matureedis agreed with them, but argued the uncreated speech is the 'inner speech' whereas the verbal speech - such as the Quraan - which has a sound and letters is not the speech of Allaah, and is created. Allaah is sought for help.

Abu Haneefah

The view of imam Abu Haneefah and the Hanafi imams is the same as the rest of Ahlus-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah. Imam Abu Ja'far at-Tahaawi said in expressing the belief of Abu Haneefah, Abu Yoosuf and Muhammad in his treatsie regarding the Quraan:

And indeed, the Quraan is the Speech of Allaah. From Him it originated without [asking] how [منه بدا بلا كيفية], as speech [قولا]. He sent it down to His Messenger as revelation. The believers affirmed it as true, and were certain that it is truly the Speech of Allaah Most High in reality [كلام الله تعالى بالحقيقة].

How eloquent was imam at-Tahaawi that he has refuted the entire belief of the Matureedis with just this description! May Allaah have mercy on him.

(The Quraan is the speech of Allaah): This answers the Matureedis who argued it is not correct to say the Quraan is the speech of Allaah which is uncreated. Imam at-Tahaawi says the Quraan is considered the speech of Allaah.

(From Him it originated without [asking] how as speech): Imam at-Tahaawi tells us that the Quraan originated, meaning it came from Allaah in the form of speech [قول]. [Qawl] is a verbal noun, and as such it stresses that it really was an action of saying these words. Allaah emphasized the same action in the verse:

وكلم الله موسى تكليما

And Allaah certainly spoke to Moosa [تكليما] (An-Nisa 4:164)

Similarly, it refutes the idea of the Jahmiyyah of the Mu'tazilah who said that Allaah created the Quraan into objects such as the air or the tree, as the Matureedis believe. Rather, he says that the Quraan came from Allaah, which is true as it is His speech, and to Him it will return.

The words 'without how' means the howness of Allaah's speech is unknown, not that it is metaphorical. Allaah, exalted is He, speaks, and the Quraan is His speech. How he did so? We do not know, nor do we need to know. What is required of us is to believe in it as it has come.

(it is truly the Speech of Allaah Most High in reality): He said 'in reality', which refutes the errnonous idea that the speech of Allaah which is uncreated is al-Kalam an-Nafsi (inner speech), because then the Quraan would not be real speech, rather metaphorical, which imam at-Tahaawi has denied.

A speech act which is thought and not spoken is not speech in reality, otherwise a mute would also be a speaker. It would also follow that what is written in the scripture cannot be called Quraan or the word of Allaah; it would only be an interpretation of Allaah’s speech, not the speech itself. If a mute were to gesture concerning something and another person understood him and wrote down what he was trying to say, it would be the latter person’s words that he used to express the mute’s idea. This example exactly illustrates the view the Matureedis hold. To be sure, they do not call Allaah mute; but they do say that the angel grasps the idea that subsists in Allaah without any letters or sounds. The angel grasps this pure idea and then he expresses it in words. It is the angel, then, that composed the Quraan and articulated it in Arabic, or Allaah created the words of the angel in a thing other than him, such as air.

Imam at-Tahaawi continued:

"It is uncreated, unlike the speech of creatures. Whoever hears it and claims that it is human speech has committed disbelief. Allaah has blamed him, censured him, and threatens him with Fire, wherein the Almighty said, ‘I will burn him in the Fire,’ When Allaah threatens with the Fire those who said, ‘This is only human speech,’ we know with certainty that it is the speech of the Creator of humanity and it does not resemble the speech of humanity."

(It is uncreated unlike the speech of creatures): Once again, Imam at-Tahaawi differentiates that the speech of Allaah which is the Quraan is uncreated, and it is unlike human speech.

(Whoever hears it and claims that it is human speech has committed disbelief ... it is the speech of the Creator of humanity and it does not resemble the speech of humanity): The Matureedis who denied the speech of Allaah having words and letters did so under the misguided assumption that speech requires intsruments and organs like the tongue, teeth, mouth, and so on. However, it is known by consensus of the Salaf and scholars of the Language that speech or statement encompass both the word and meaning. And that speech consists of letters and sound. Imam as-Sijzi (d. 444 AH) has narrated a consensus on that from before Ibn Kullab who innovated the view of al-Kalam an-Nafsi and al-Kalam al-Lafdhi. We can see from imam at-Tahaawi's word (whoever hears it) that he ascribed hearing to the Quraan. Likewise, he said (it is the speech (قول) of the Creator of humanity). Both of these indicate and prove that the three imams, and at-Tahaawi himself held that the Quraan is the speech of Allaah and is uncreated, that it consists of letters and sounds that all speech consists of, however this speech is unlike the speech of the creation.

Abu Haneefah stated in al-Fiqh al-Akbar (pg. 40-50)

"The Quraan is the word of Allaah, whether written in the book, remembered in the hearts, recited by the tongues or revealed upon the Prophet ... It is the uncreated speech of Allaah. The speech of Moosa and other created beings is itself created. But the Quraan is the word of Allaah and not their speech. Moses heard Allaah’s words when He spoke to him. He spoke to him with the speech which is His attribute from eternity."

And in al-Fiqh al-Akbar (pg. 301):

"The Quraan is not created."

Imam Hibatullah al-Laalikaai in his famous [شرح أصول اعتقاد أهل السنة والجماعة] stated regarding the Quraan:

"What has been narrated regarding the consensus of the Companions that the Quraan is not created.."

Until he said:

"And among the first generation of jurists were: ... An-Nu'maan ibn Thaabit Abu Haneefah, Abu Yusoof Ya'qoob ibn Ibraheem, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ...

I have not found any statement in his attributed books that contradicts this view or from the work of At-Tahaawi. For the reasons mentioned above, scholars have consistently disregarded the narrations explicitly stating that Abu Haneefah believed in the createdness of the Quraan or that he died upon it, and they have definitively affirmed that Abu Haneefah's position was that the Quraan was not created.

In [تاريخ بغداد ج ١٥ ص ٥١٧] from Ahmad ibn Hanbal:

"It is not authentic near us that Abu Haneefah said the Quraan is created."

In al-Intiqa' (pg. 166) of Ibn 'Abd al-Barr, Sahl ibn 'Aamir said from Bishr ibn al-Waleed:

"We were with the Leader of the Believers, and Isma'eel ibn Hammad ibn Abi Haneefah said, 'The Quraan is created. This is my view and the view of my forefathers.' So Bishr ibn al-Waleed said, 'As for your view, then yes. As for the view of your forefathers, then no.'"

Bishr ibn al-Waleed is from one of the close students of Abu Yoosuf (may Allaah have mercy on him).

It is reported from Abu Yoosuf by adh-Dhahabi in [مختصر العلو للعلي الغفار ص ١٥٥] from Ibn Abi Haatim and al-Bayhaqi in [الأسماء والصفات ص٢٥١]:

"I debated Abu Haneefah for six months, and we agreed that whoever says 'the Quraan is created' is a disbeliever."

Al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi in [تاريخ بغداد ج ١٥ ص ٥١٨] narrated from Muhammad ibn Shaathaan al-Jawhari,

I heard Abu Sulaymaan al-Juzjaani and Ma'lla ibn Mansoor ar-Razi say: "‘Neither Abu Haneefah, nor Abu Yoosuf, nor Zufar, nor Muhammad, nor any of their companions spoke concerning the Quraan. Rather, it was Bishr al-Marisi and Ibn Abi Du'aad who spoke concerning the Quraan. So these are the ones who tarnished the companions of Abu Haneefah [i.e. their reputation]."

Abu Sulaymaan and Ma'lla are from the foremost students of Abu Yoosuf and Muhammad, may Allaah have mercy on them all.

Imam Abu Nasr 'Ubaydullah ibn Sa'eed as-Sijzi (d. 444 AH) wrote a letter in which he refuted much of what the Matureedis held regarding the Quraan and the speech of Allaah. It is titled: "رسالة السجزي إلى أهل زبيد في الرد على من أنكر الحرف والصوت" or "The letter of as-Sijzi to the people of Zabeed on the Refutation of one who denies the Letter and the Sound".

Adh-Dhahabi described him as: "The learned imam, the Memorizer, shaykh as-Sunnah." And, "The Memorizer, the Imam, the Scholar of the Sunnah" (Source) (Source)

Ibn 'Abdul-Hadi said, "The Memorizer, the imam, the scholar of the Sunnah ... He authored the book 'al-Ibanah' on the issue of the Quraan, a magnificent book that demonstrates his leadership and profound knowledge." (Source)

The scholars of biographies such as 'Abd al-Qaadir al-Qurashi, Taqi ad-Deen at-Tameemi and al-Kamlaai in [الجواهر المضية فى طبقات الحنفية], [الطبقات السنية في تراجم الحنفية], [البدور المضية في تراجم الحنفية] respectively have mentioned him among the scholars of the Hanafis, and said of him, "One of the Memorizers (الحفاظ)".

He studied under his father. At-Tameemi said about his father, Sa'eed ibn Haatim ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad as-Sijzi, "The father of Al-Haafidh Ubaydullah Abu Nasr Al-Waa'ili As-Sijzi, ... and He, may Allaah have mercy on him, was one of the jurists and virtuous people of Kufa." End quote from [الطبقات السنية في تراجم الحنفية]

In conlusion, the view of imam Abu Haneefah and his students and those after them held the same position regarding the Quraan as held by Ahlus-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah. They held that the speech of Allaah is an attribute of His. He has always been able to speek, He speaks whenever He wants, however He wants. He has a voice, unlike the voice of creation, and His speech has letters. The Quraan is from His speech, which He sent down upon the Prophet (peace be upon him). The Quraan that is recited, memorized and is in the books, is uncreated, and the speech of Allaah. Thus the opposition of the Matureedis with the Imam and Ahlus-Sunnah is evident in this section.

4- Belief in the 'Uluw (Highness) of Allaah

The Matureediyyah

Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi and his followers do not affirm Allaah's exaltness in absolute terms, rather they delegates the meaning of His istawa' [rising, exaltation] to Allaah. With that, they say Allaah (may He be exalted) is not in any place, nor over any place, nor under any place. Rather, He is where He was before the creation of the throne.

In [تفسير الماتريدي ج ٦ ص ٥١٤], Al-Matureedi says:

"And His saying, (They fear their Lord above them)

"'Above', 'below', 'underneath', and similar expressions regarding places and positions do not in themselves imply honor, nobility, or rank. This is because it is possible for someone who was above another in place or seating to later be beneath and lower than him. So the one who became physically higher gains no honor, nobility, or rank merely by being above him, nor does the one who was beneath him thereby acquire humiliation or disgrace. For what is understood from 'above him' is not necessarily elevation [in a real sense], nor from 'beneath him' lowness [in a real sense]. After all, those who climb mountains and elevated places are not thereby described as possessing loftiness and greatness."

"However, when it is said, 'So-and-so is in authority over Iraq or over Khurasan', this carries a sense of exaltation, because it refers to his power, authority, the execution of his command and will, and his dominion over them, or to his awareness of all that they conceal inwardly and outwardly, what they declare and reveal, and his knowledge of all their actions. In this sense, it is permissible for the term 'above' to be understood. And Allaah knows best.

And in [تفسير الماتريدي ج ١٠ ص ١٧٧], he said:

"It is also possible that His saying, (Do you feel secure from Him Who is in the heaven?) means: Do you feel secure from the One whose dominion and authority are in the heaven?"

In [التوحيد ص ٦٩], he stated:

"The foundational principle regarding this is that Allaah, Glorified and Exalted, existed when there was no place. And it is possible for places to come into existence and rise while He remains as He always was. Thus, He is as He always was, and He is now as He has always been — exalted above alteration, vanishing, change, and falsity."

Abu al-Yusr al-Bazdawi in [أصول الدين ص ٤٠] stated:

"Ahlus Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah [he means the Matureedis] say Allaah, the most High, is not on a place, not upon the throne, nor upon anything other than it, and He is not over the throne, and there is no direction for him."

In conclusion, the Matureedis believe Allaah does not exist in any place, nor outside anything nor inside, nor is He exalted above anything, nor is anything below Him in any way. They say He is where He was before He created the throne. For the one who gives this belief some attention, he will recognize that this essentially means Allaah has no existence anywhere since existence implies being somewhere, whether outside or inside something. A being has no existence if it does not exist anywhere. That is what seperates an existing thing from an idea. An idea does not exist anywhere. It is merely the concept in the mind. Likewise, this is in truth how the Matureedis view Allaah, even if they do not realize it.

Abu Haneefah

Imam At-Tahaawi stated regarding the three imams:

"The throne and the footstool are true. He is independent of the throne and whatever is beneath it. He encompasses all things and He is above it (i.e. everything) [محيط بكل شيء وفوقه], and what He has created is incapable of encompassing Him."

The words of imam at-Tahaawi give a clear and apparent belief as to what the three imams believed in regards to Allaah's exaltness. He is over everything and encompasses it all. The Matureedis (as we saw) argued that the meaning of 'above' was merely about His dominion, power and authority over the creation, however this has no basis in the Arabic language.

First, according to the principle:

الأصل في الكلام الحقيقة

"The basis in speech is reality."

What it means is that on default, speech should be understood in its literal sense, not figuratively, despite the differences in intentions and purposes. Something is only understood as being figurative if the language it was spoken in and the intention of the speaker of that speech intended it as such. It is impossible to force a figurative meaning on something meant literally and it is arrogant to think that the interpreter of that speech knows more about the meaning than the one who spoke it.

When you see into why the Matureedis interpret the 'Fawqiyyah', they argue it is figurative. But they have no evidence from the Book, or the Sunnah, or from the Arabic language. Rather, their arguments all come from 'Ilm al-Kalaam and the terms and way of the philosophers.

With that dealt with, we continue. In al-Fiqh al-Akbar (by riwayah of Abu Mutee', also called al-Fiqh al-Absat), Abu Mutee' al-Balkhi asks imam Abu Haneefah about a person who says, "I do not know if my Lord is in the heavens or not." Imam Abu Haneefah replied:

"He has committed disbelief, because Allaah says, (The Most Merciful, who rose over the throne)' and His throne is above the seven heavens." I [Abu Mutee'] said, "What if he says, 'He is on the Throne,' but says, 'I do not know whether the Throne is in the heavens or on the earth'" He [Abu Hanefah] said, "He is a disbeliever, because he has denied that it is in the heavens. Whoever denies that it is in the heavens has committed disbelief." Others added, "Because Allaah is in the highest of the high, and He is called upon from above, not from below."

In some versions, he says:

"Whoever says, ‘I do not know whether my Lord is in the heaven or on the earth,’ has committed disbelief. Likewise, whoever says, ‘He is upon the Throne, but I do not know whether the Throne is in the heaven or on the earth.’ Allaah Most High is invoked from above, not from below, and this is not from the description of Lordship and Divinity in any way. Supporting this is what is narrated in the hadeeth: that a man came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) with a black slave-girl and said, ‘It has become obligatory upon me to free a slave; will this one suffice?’ The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to her, ‘Are you a believer?’ She replied, ‘Yes.’ He then said, ‘Where is Allah?’ So she pointed toward the heaven. He said, ‘Free her, for she is a believer.’”

Although we have quoted this from Al-Fiqh al-Absat, we have only done so since the Matureedis take it as evidence. This saying is established from imam Abu Haneefah and famous from multiple other routes. Even though al-Fiqh al-Absat is weak and unauthentic to the Imam, this statement of his is well recorded. Some of those who recorded it from Abu Mutee'al-Balki and quoted it: Abu Isma'eel al-Harawi in al-Farooq as mentioned by Ibn Abi al-'Izz al-Hanafi in [شرح العقيدة الطحاوية], Adh-Dhahabi in [العلو للعلي الغفار], and many others.

Before we move on, let us address what the Matureedis quote from imam Abu Haneefah based on what came in al-Fiqh al-Absat, wherein he said:

I (Abu Mutee') asked, If someone asks ‘Where is Allaah?’ He replied, "It is said to him, Allaah was, and there was no place, prior to His creating the creation. Allaah was, and there was no 'where', and there was no creation. He is the Creator of everything."

One can see the clear contradiction this has to the previous texts where imam Abu Haneefah uses the hadeeth of the slave-girl and the Ayah of al-Istawa (Rising) to establish that Allaah is in the Heaven, and that whoever rejects it or doubts it is a disbeliever. So which is the more authentic saying? Then undoubtedly it is the first one, because the second one is actually absent from older copies of al-Fiqh al-Akbar. Even some early explainers of al-Fiqh al-Akbar from the Matureedis do not mention this saying, even though it supports their view. Likewise, even if some of them mention it, then it comes under the same reason many of the scholars denied it being his work: the work uses words upon the terminology of later scholars. To put that into perspective, imagine finding a work written in modern English but dated to the era of Shakespeare. No one would possibly think that this work is authentic and from that era. All of them would point to the clear difference in language as proof that this must be added later.

The same is for this particular quote, and others as well such as the statements of the Lafdhiyyah of the Jahmiyyah being found in the text. Due to this, Shiblee an-Nu'maani al-Hanafi stated:

"This book too is said to be a composition of that era, yet by that time this style of writing had not yet emerged. It is written with such conciseness and arrangement as is characteristic of the later scholars."

"In one place it contains the terms jawhar (substance) and ʿarad (accident), even though these philosophical expressions had not yet entered the language at that time. No doubt, during the era of Al-Mansoor, books of philosophy were translated from Greek into Arabic, but this was during the final period of the Imam’s life. It is difficult to imagine that immediately upon their translation these terms would spread so rapidly that they would become common in ordinary writings..."

"Even according to the principles of transmission, this matter is not established. In the works composed in the second, third, and even fourth centuries, no trace of this book is found. The earliest work — as far as we know — in which this treatise is mentioned is al-Usool of Fakhr al-Islam al-Bazdawi, which is a composition of the fifth century. Abu Haneefah had thousands of students, many of whom were themselves teachers, and through chains of transmission their students reached into the hundreds of thousands. It is extremely improbable that a work authored by the Imam would exist and yet its name would not even be mentioned within such a vast circle."

He ends by saying:

"My opinion is that Abu Mutee' al-Balkhī himself had written down some issues in a treatise on his own authority, and gradually attributed it to the imam. This is supported by adh-Dhahabi in ʿIbar fee Khabar man Ghabar, who mentioned Abu Mutee' with the words: ‘the companion [i.e. author] of al-Fiqh al-Akbar,’ the apparent meaning of which is that Abu Muteeʿ himself was its author. I am also of the opinion that the present arrangement and wording of al-Fiqh al-Akbar are much later even than the time of Abu Mutee'. This is not something unprecedented. al-Jaami' as-Sagheer, which is the work of Imam Muhammad, received its present arrangement from Abu Taahir ad-Dabbas, who lived in the fourth century. The difference is that in the case of al-Jaami' as-Sagheer, the original wording remained the same and only the arrangement changed, whereas the style of al-Fiqh al-Akbar itself appears to belong to a later age."

Thus, it is clear that statements and views that do not belong to the time of the Imam or even after him should not be attributed to him, then taken as evidence. Even though the work is not of the Imam, some statements in it are well known from him. This is what the majority of the scholars quote from. Not as affirmation of the book, but affirmation that he held that view.

Moving forward, al-Bayhaqi in [الأسماء والصفات ج ٢ ص ٣٣٧] narrated from Nooh al-Jaami:

"I was with Abu Haneefah at the beginning of the emergence of these ideas, when a woman from Tirmidh came to him. She used to associate with Jahm ibn Safwan, and then entered Kufa. I think there were no fewer than ten thousand people supporting her views.It was said to her: 'Here is a man who has studied the rational science; he is called Abu Haneefah, so go to him.'' So she came to him and said: 'Are you the one who teaches people legal matters, while you yourself have abandoned your religion? Where is the god whom you worship?' He remained silent for seven days without answering her. Then he came out to us, having written: 'Allaah, Mighty and Exalted is He, is in Heaven, not on Earth.' A man said to him, 'What about Allaah's statement, (And He is with you)?' He replied, 'It is like when you write to a man, ‘I am with you,’ even though you are absent from him.'

After narrating this, Al-Bayhaqi said:

"Abu Haneefah, may Allaah be pleased with him, was correct in what he negated about Allaah being on Earth, and he was correct in what he mentioned regarding the interpretation of the verse, and he followed the general understanding of the verse that Allaah is in the Heaven."

The narrator of this report is Abu 'Ismah Nooh ibn Abi Maryam. Adh-Dhahabi reported in [العلو للعلي الغفار] from ad-Darimi who said:

"I heard Abu 'Ismah Nooh ibn Abi Maryam, may Allaah have mercy on him, being asked by a man about Allaah being in the heaven. He then narrated the hadeeth of the Prophet (peace be upon him) when he asked the slave girl, 'Where is Allaah?' She said, 'In the heaven.' He said, 'Free her, for she is a believer.' Then he said, 'The Prophet (peace be upon him), called her a believer because she knew that Allaah is in Heaven.'"

In [العلو للعلي الغفار], from Hisham ibn 'Ubaydullah ar-Razi (d. 221 AH), who had imprisoned a man over having the views of the Jahmiyyah, and the man was brought to him so he asked:

"Do you testify that Allaah is upon His Throne, separate from His creation?" The man replied: 'I do not know what ‘separate from His creation’ means.' So he said: "Return him [to prison], for he has not yet repented."

Imam adh-Dhahabi then said about him:

"Hisham ibn 'Ubaydullah was one of the leading jurists upon the school of Abu Haneefah. He studied fiqh under Muhammad ibn al-Hasan. He possessed remarkable stature and immense respect in his land."

Jareer ibn 'Abd al-Hameed ad-Dabbi (d. 188 AH) who was one of the scholars of Hadeeth, said as in [العلو للعلي الغفار]:

"The speech of the Jahmiyyah is sweet at its beginning but poisonous at its end. They only seek to say that there is no God above the heaven."

Both Al-Qurashi in [الجواهر المضية في طبقات الحنفية] and At-Tameemi in [الطبقات السنية في تراجم الحنفية] have mentioned that Jareer took Fiqh and some legal matters from Abu Haneefah.

In [العلو للعلي الغفار] from Abu Mu'adh Khaalid ibn Sulaymaan al-Balkhi (d. 199 AH):

"[Abu Qudamah as-Sarakhsi said] I heard Abu Muadh al-Balkhi, Khaalid ibn Sulaymaan, in Farghana Valley saying: Jahm was at the crossing-place of Tirmidh. He was eloquent in speech, but he possessed neither knowledge nor companionship with the people of knowledge. The Samaniyyah spoke to him and said: "Describe to us your Lord, Mighty and Majestic, whom you worship." So he entered a house and did not come out of it. Then after some days he came out to them and said: "He is this air, with everything, in everything, and nothing is devoid of Him." Then Abu Mu'adh said: "The enemy of Allaah has lied. Rather, Allaah, Majestic is His Glory, is on the Throne as He described Himself."

Al-Qurashi in [الجواهر المضية في طبقات الحنفية] and At-Tameemi in [الطبقات السنية في تراجم الحنفية] have mentioned Abu Mu'adh was one of those whom Imam Abu Haneefah personally deemed qualified to give fatwa when he was asked for such people.

Imam Abu Nasr as-Sijzi al-Hanafi stated as recorded in [العلو للعلي الغفار] from his book al-Ibanah which he wrote on the Sunnah:

"Our Imams, such as Sufyaan ath-Thawri, Maalik ibn Anas, Hammad ibn Salamah, Hammad ibn Zayd, Sufyan ibn 'Uyaynah, Al-Fudayl ibn 'Iyad, Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and Ishaaq ibn Rahuwayh, were agreed that Allaah, Glorified is He, is above the Throne by His Essence, and that His knowledge encompasses every place, and that He descends to the lowest heaven, and that He becomes angry, is pleased, and speaks whatever He wills."

Imam adh-Dhahahi then elaborated:

"This is what is famously and reliably transmitted from them, except for the phrase ‘by His Essence’. That expression is from his own addition. He attributed it to them by way of inferred meaning, in order to distinguish between the Throne and other places."

In conclusion, the early Hanafis and the imam himself did not hold what the Matureedis hold. Rather, a lot of them mentioned that those who said anything other than what they said was the saying and statements of the Jahmiyyah, whether the view was Allaah is everywhere, or the view that one is uncertain where He is, or outright denying that Allaah is in the Heavens, on His throne.

6- Understanding of Eeman (Faith)

The Matureediyyah

Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi held that faith (Eeman) is belief in the heart, while actions and speech are both out of the reality of faith. Some of the Matureerdis followed him in this.

Abu Mansoor said in [تفسير الماتريدي ج ١ ص ٣٨٥]:

"Faith (Al-Eeman) near us is affirmation in the heart, and its evidence is the saying of the people of Tafseer, and literature that they explained "they believed" [آمنوا] as "they affirmed" [صدّقوا] in the Quraan."

They say the belief in the heart alone makes one a believer in Islam, and statement or speech only necessitates the laws of Islam on him.

Abu al-Mu'een an-Nasafi in [التمهيد في أصول الدين ص ١٤٦]:

"Faith in the linguistic sense means affirmation and belief. Thus, anyone who believes another person regarding what he reports is called, in the language, a believer in him and one who gives him credence ... This linguistic meaning, amely affirmation with the heart, is also the reality of the faith that is due in obligation from a servant as a right owed to Allaah Most High. It is that one believes the Messenger (peace be upon him)regarding what he brought from Allaah Most High. Whoever possesses this affirmation is a believer in what concerns his relationship with Allaah Most High. As for verbal affirmation, it is needed so that people may know of his faith and consequently apply the rulings of Islam to him."

Al-Ghaznawi said in [أصول الدين للغزنوي ص ٢٥١ ـ ٢٥٢]:

"Faith is the belief in the heart, which is the obligatory faith upon the servant. It also includes verbal acknowledgment to manifest what is in the heart to people, so that the rulings of Islaam can apply to him. Whoever has belief in the heart is a believer in the sight of Allaah alone. Whoever possesses both belief and verbal acknowledgement is a believer in the sight of Allaah and people. Faith involves believing in Allaah, His angels, His books, His messenger, and the Last Day. This indicates that faith is indeed the belief in the heart, and that the opposite of faith is disbelief and denial. Belief and denial are actions of the heart."

Thus in conclusion, Abu Mansoor al-Matureedi and some of the Matureedis who followed him believe that faith is only the belief in the heart, while both actions and speech is out of the reality of faith. According to them, if one has belief in the heart, then he is a believer in the eyes of Allaah, while verbally affirming what is in the heart will make the laws of Islam apply on them. This is one of worst types of Irjaa', and this is the Irjaa' of the extremist Murji'ah.

Abu Haneefah

According to imam Abu Haneefah, the two companions, as stated by imam Abu Ja'far at-Tahaawi, faith is belief and affirmation in the heart, along with verbal affirmation, while actions are out of the definition of faith.

At-Tahaawi said:

"Faith consists of affirmation by the tongue and acceptance by the soul."

Regarding actions, the Imam does not consider them in the definition of Eeman which is different than what the Matureedis and Murji'ah held that actions are just an additional pillar. Likewise, this is also against how Ahlus-Sunnah defined Eeman as, since they included actions in its definition. According to imam Abu Haneefah, Abu Yoosuf, Muhammad and others such as At-Tahaawi, actions are part of Eeman absolutely, as they say one's leaving of actions is sinful. This is unlike the Murji'ah who claimed that actions are not part of Eeman in any capacity, and that one who leaves actions is still a true believer.

This difference is only linguistic, In sha Allaah, as mentioned by Imam adh-Dhahabi and Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allaah have mercy on him), and the imam and his students agree on Eeman in an absolute sense. Similarly, they have mentioned that the Imam's mistake here (and that of the Murji'ah al-Fuqahaa') is a light one, and it does not make them exit out of Ahlus-Sunnah as a whole.

In al-Majmoo' (13/39), ibn Taymiyyah stated:

" This innovation is among the slightest innovations, as much of the dispute in it is a dispute over terminology and wording rather than judgment. For the jurists who hold this view, such as Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, Abu Haneefah, and others, they are in agreement with rest of Ahlus-Sunnah that Allaah punishes those deserving of punishment among the major sinners with Hellfire, then brings them out through intercession, as authentic narrations have mentioned. They also agree that verbal affirmation is essential in Eeman, and that obligatory actions are necessary, and neglecting them warrants blame and punishment. The dispute, therefore, lies in actions: are they part of faith or not, and in exceptions, and similar matters. Its general nature is verbal dispute, for when Eeman is mentioned as a whole, actions are included in it. "

Imam adh-Dhahabi in [Siyar A'lam an-Nubala (5/233)] stated:

"Indeed they (i.e. Murji'ah al-Fuqahaa') do not count Salaah and Zakaah from Eeman, and they say Eeman is affirmation with the tongue, and certainty in the heart. And the dispute upon this is linguistic, In Sha Allaah. And extremism in irjaa' is only one who says abandoning the obligatory duties is not harmful to one's Tawheed."

Thus according to imam Abu Haneefah, the close students such as Abu Yoosuf, Muhammad, Ibraheem ibn Tahmaan, at-Tahaawi, the Hanafis generally and some of the Matureedis, Eeman is defined as belief and verbal affirmation, while actions are not part of the definition. But they are still necessary, and one is harmed by abandoning actions legislated by Allaah. They agree with what is the belief of Ahlus-Sunnah in general or absolute term of Eeman. This is unlike the Matureedi view which has deviated significantly away from Ahlus-Sunnah, and do not agree with them, neither in definition, nor in absolute terms.