| Author | Topic |
Junaidj
CANADA
|
 Topic initiated on Friday, November 12, 2004 - 1:41 AM 
Hanafis - The Great Paradox
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/islam-hanafi.htm
Abu Hanifa's interpretation of Muslim law was extremely tolerant of differences within Muslim communities. He also separated belief from practice, elevating belief over practice.
Broad-minded without being lax, this school appeals to reason (personal judgment) and a quest for the better. It is generally tolerant and the largest movement within Islam. The Hanafi school is known for its liberal religious orientation that elevates belief over practice and is tolerant of differences within Muslim communities.
Hanafi scholars refuse to control a human religious or spiritual destiny, and refuse to give that right to any human institution. Among the Hudud crimes, those crimes against God, blasphemy is not listed by the Hanafis. Hanafis concluded that blasphemy could not be punished by the state. The state should not be involved in deciding God-human relationships. Rather, the state should be concerned only with the violation of human rights within the jurisdiction of the human affairs and human relationships.
Comment: Then why are the Mullahs so damn uptight and unreasonable over every issue? |
|
aslam
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Saturday, November 13, 2004 - 8:56 AM 
Salams,
Indeed Abu Hanifa was a great jurist and his school has been very tolerant but of late the hanafis have been very intolerant and rigid???? |
|
saadiamalik
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Saturday, November 13, 2004 - 1:11 PM
quote:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/intro/islam-hanafi.htm
Abu Hanifa's interpretation of Muslim law was extremely tolerant of differences within Muslim communities. He also separated belief from practice, elevating belief over practice.
...
Comment: Then why are the Mullahs so damn uptight and unreasonable over every issue?
Assalaamu Alaikum.
The connection you seem to be drawing between the Hanafi school and 'mullah-ism'/'maulvi-ism' seems incorrect. Almost all Pakistani Muslims call themselves Hanafis. I urge you to try and quench your thirst for learning about the Hanafi school from any of them. You'll mostly find yourself disappointed. I think almost no one would know what Imam Hanifa said, what jurisprudence comes from his pen....
In Pakistani, the Barelvis, the Deobandis and the Ahle Hadith, all call themselves Hanafis. So, if Imam Hanifa placed belief above practice, how can the three "sects" ever be reconciled. The very thing that differentiates them all is 'belief'. [Sssh, why can't we just be 'Muslims', above everything else!] Is my analysis faulty? I'm slightly unsure. Comments are welcome.
Wasalaam.
Saadia
Edited by: saadiamalik on Saturday, November 13, 2004 1:14 PM |
|
Junaidj
CANADA
|
Posted - Sunday, November 14, 2004 - 5:53 AM
>>The connection you seem to be drawing between the Hanafi school and 'mullah-ism'/'maulvi-ism' seems incorrect.
My point was to show the inherent contradiction between people who call themselves Hanafis and the approach of their grand master :)
>>Almost all Pakistani Muslims call themselves Hanafis. I urge you to try and quench your thirst for learning about the Hanafi school from any of them.
That is what I have been trying to do for the past decade or so :)
Only today a Deobandi glorified murder through three Hadith on 'Tawheen e Risalat'. I was shocked at the self righteousness he felt in talking about it.
Edited by: junaidj on Sunday, November 14, 2004 6:27 AM |
|
saadiamalik
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Monday, November 15, 2004 - 7:27 AM
quote:
Only today a Deobandi glorified murder through three Hadith on 'Tawheen e Risalat'. I was shocked at the self righteousness he felt in talking about it.
I think, every now and then, we are all capable of taking things for granted, and seeing no other way. I've found myself amazed at my ignorance many times. Till a couple of years back, I never questioned the practice of "offering Fateha" at graves. When I realised how baseless that was - I mean, Fateha is a prayer to the God; what's the purpose of reciting it at a grave; if anything, it could stand on the borders of shirk - I was appalled at my own silent acceptance of the practice for so long.
This mode of unquestioning acceptance can get very dangerous in the case of some people. Probably, the Socratic method could be adopted with them, for mutual benefits. Keep questioning, keep the conversation going, and see if you reach a valid conclusion i.e. based on the Qur'an and/or Sunnah.
Wasalaam.
Saadia
|
|
Junaidj
CANADA
|
Posted - Monday, November 15, 2004 - 10:47 AM
>>I was appalled at my own silent acceptance of the practice for so long.
Same goes for me.
But I suppose there is a difference between following a wrong ritual and justifying killing someone in cold murder.
Question: How did Elizabeth I manage to get rid of Catholic bigotry when she took over from her sister Mary? How did she manage to unify the Church?
So far as I know, very slyly she took care of the clerics, and then imposed a strong law outlawing persecution of faith.
If Zia could bring in draconian laws, we can through the law, reverse them. Institute new laws against bigoted speeches and clerics.
Edited by: junaidj on Monday, November 15, 2004 10:53 AM |
|
haqqani
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 1:03 AM
| How can we be sure that what is nowadays called Hanafi Madhab is really the madhab of Imam Abu Hanifa. Because I know not even one book from the Imam. The fatawa books which the hanafi scholars refers to are fatawa Shami or Alamgiri which were I think written atleast 1000 years after Imam Abu Hanifa. Today we see a lot of unauthentic ahadith from Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) how could the madhab of Abu Hanifa survived wothout corruption ? |
|
Malix
UNITED KINGDOM
|
Posted - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 7:03 PM
" Almost all Pakistani Muslims call themselves Hanafis."
SALAM
i didnt get a chnce 2 read all of it
but can any1 plz tll me
CAN 1 SAY DAT DA R SUNI, WAHABI etc.
is it rite or rong 2 do dat
JAZAKALLAH if any1 of u can clr dis mattr
SALAM |
|
saadiamalik
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Tuesday, November 16, 2004 - 7:38 PM
quote:
" Almost all Pakistani Muslims call themselves Hanafis."
SALAM
i didnt get a chnce 2 read all of it
but can any1 plz tll me
CAN 1 SAY DAT DA R SUNI, WAHABI etc.
is it rite or rong 2 do dat
JAZAKALLAH if any1 of u can clr dis mattr
SALAM
Assalaamu Alaikum.
I think if someone willfully calls himself/herself a 'Sunni','Wahhabi' etc., then its a different matter; else, it would be ideal if we could all just take pride in calling ourselves "Muslims" because that's what Allah requires of us. Categorising ourselves into distinct religious doctrines only gives rise to hatred and sectarianism. I know I would be offended if anyone were to call me a "Sunni" or a "Wahhabi", simply because I identify with myself as Muslim, and Muslim alone.
Allah Hafiz.
Saadia |
|
aslam
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Sunday, November 21, 2004 - 9:39 AM
quote:
How can we be sure that what is nowadays called Hanafi Madhab is really the madhab of Imam Abu Hanifa. Because I know not even one book from the Imam. The fatawa books which the hanafi scholars refers to are fatawa Shami or Alamgiri which were I think written atleast 1000 years after Imam Abu Hanifa. Today we see a lot of unauthentic ahadith from Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) how could the madhab of Abu Hanifa survived wothout corruption ?
Haqqani has raised a very pertinent question!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
spagyrist
USA
|
Posted - Monday, November 22, 2004 - 7:35 PM
| So do we say belief is fard and deeds are wajib (Hanifa making a distinction between fard and wajib)? |
|
spagyrist
USA
|
Posted - Wednesday, November 24, 2004 - 2:29 PM
Here in an interesting article on Hanafi fiqh and discusses why he the imam did not write a book of fiqh:
Click Here |
|
saadiamalik
PAKISTAN
|
Posted - Wednesday, November 24, 2004 - 6:10 PM
quote:
So do we say belief is fard and deeds are wajib (Hanifa making a distinction between fard and wajib)?
I think - not sure - this differentiation that Imam Abu Hanifa made between beliefs and actions was due to the over-shadowing debates between who constitutes a Muslim etc., following the initial sorry incident of Kharijies, against Hazrat Ali(r).
Anyone well-versed in Islamic history here?
Wasalaam |
|
 Reply to Topic 
Printer Friendly |
| Jump To: |
|
|
|