16
whereupon he retorted—he was a Hanafi—“Abu Hurayrah’s hadiths are not acceptable (1).”
He had barely finished the sentence when a huge serpent dropped onto him from the roof of the mosque. The people sprang aside in panic, and the young man fled while the serpent pursued him.
They called out to him, “Repent! Repent!” so he said, “I repent.” The serpent then vanished, leaving no trace at all.
Its chain of transmission consists of leading authorities.
As for Abu Hurayrah, he is the ultimate exemplar in preserving everything he heard from the Messenger—peace and blessings be upon him—and conveying it verbatim. He narrated the hadith of the muṣarrāh with its precise wording; therefore we are obliged to act upon it, for it stands as an independent proof in its own right.
Moreover, Abu Hurayrah was appointed by ʿUmar as governor of Bahrayn, and he issued a legal opinion based on this hadith concerning a woman who had been divorced with a single pronouncement and then
(1) In Usul al-Sarakhsi 1/341 it is stated: “Any report transmitted by Abu Hurayra that is in harmony with qiyas (analogical reasoning) must be followed; if it conflicts with qiyas yet the community has nevertheless accepted it, it is still to be followed; otherwise, sound legal analogy takes precedence over his narration in questions where juristic opinion would otherwise be blocked.”
Fakhr al-Islam explains: “The transmitter of a report is either (a) a jurist (faqih), (b) a non-jurist who is, however, well known for hadith transmission, or (c) a non-jurist known only for one or two narrations. The report of a jurist is accepted and must be acted upon even when it contradicts qiyas. The report of a non-jurist who is nevertheless renowned for narration is likewise accepted and may override analogy, except when it conflicts with every conceivable analogy and leaves no room for opinion. This is the position chosen by Imam Isa ibn Aban and Qadi Abu Zayd, whereas Shaykh Abu al-Hasan al-Karkhi sides with the first view.”
Some scholars, while scrutinising Abu Hurayra’s hadith concerning the musarra (an animal whose milk is intentionally retained before sale), argued: “Abu Hurayra was not a jurist, and the hadith contradicts all analogies.” Their claim that “Abu Hurayra was not a jurist” is plainly questionable, for he was undoubtedly a mujtahid: he delivered fatwas during the Prophet’s lifetime and afterwards, and he even opposed Ibn Abbas in legal matters. An authentic report relates that they differed about the waiting-period (‘idda) of a pregnant widow— Ibn Abbas ruled for the longer of the two terms, whereas Abu Hurayra ruled that it ends with childbirth.
Abu Hanifa likewise acted upon Abu Hurayra’s hadith, “Whoever eats forgetfully should complete his fast,” although according to his own analogy the fast would be invalid. He therefore abandoned qiyas in favour of Abu Hurayra’s report.
See also Muhammad Bakhit al-Mutii’s marginalia on Sallam al-Wusul, 3/767 and 769.
فَقَالَ - وَكَانَ حَنَفِيّاً -: أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ غَيْرُ مَقْبُوْلِ الحَدِيْثِ (١) .
فَمَا اسْتَتَمَّ كَلاَمَهُ حَتَّى سَقَطَ عَلَيْهِ حَيَّةٌ عَظِيْمَةٌ مِنْ سَقْفِ الجَامِعِ، فَوَثَبَ النَّاسُ مِنْ أَجْلِهَا، وَهَرَبَ الشَّابُّ مِنْهَا وَهِيَ تَتْبَعُهُ.
فَقِيْلَ لَهُ: تُبْ تُبْ.
فَقَالَ: تُبْتُ.
فَغَابَتِ الحَيَّةُ، فَلَمْ يُرَ لَهَا أَثَرٌ.
إِسْنَادُهَا أَئِمَّةٌ.
وَأَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ: إِلَيْهِ المُنْتَهَى فِي حَفِظِ مَا سَمِعَهُ مِنَ الرَّسُوْلِ ﵇ وَأَدَائِهِ بِحُرُوْفِهِ، وَقَدْ أَدَّى حَدِيْثَ المُصَرَّاةِ بِأَلْفَاظِهِ، فَوَجَبَ عَلَيْنَا العَمَلُ بِهِ، وَهُوَ أَصْلٌ بِرَأْسِهِ.
وَقَدْ وَلِيَ أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ البَحْرَيْنِ لِعُمَرَ، وَأَفتَى بِهَا فِي مَسْأَلَةِ المُطَلَّقَةِ طَلْقَةً ثُمَّ
(١) في " أصول السرخسي " ١ / ٣٤١: ما وافق القياس من رواية أبي هريرة، فهو معمول به، وما خالف القياس، فإن تلقته الأمة بالقبول، فهو معمول به، وإلا فالقياس الصحيح شرعا مقدم على روايته فيما ينسد باب الرأي فيه.
وقال فخر الإسلام: راوي الخبر إما فقيه أو غير فقيه لكن عرف بالرواية، أو غير فقيه لم يعرف إلا بحديث أو حديثين.
فخبر الفقيه مقبول يجب العمل به وإن خالف القياس، وخبر غير الفقيه المعروف بالرواية أيضا مقبول يترك به القياس، إلا
إذا خالف جميع الاقيسة، وانسد باب الرأي بالكلية، وهو مختار الامام عيسى بن أبان، والقاضي أبي زيد، وذهب الشيخ أبو الحسن الكرخي إلى أنه كالأول.
وقال بعضهم وهو بصدد البحث في خبر أبي هريرة في " المصراة ": إن أبا هريرة غير فقيه، والحديث مخالف للاقيسة بأسرها: وفي قولهم: " أبو هريرة غير فقيه "، نظر ظاهر، فإنه ﵁ فقيه مجتهد لا شك في فقاهته، فقد كان يفتي في زمن النبي ﷺ وبعده، وكان يعارض ابن عباس وفتواه، كما جاء في الخبر الصحيح أنه خالف ابن عباس في عدة الحامل المتوفى عنها زوجها، حيث حكم ابن عباس بأبعد الاجلين، وحكم هو بوضع الحمل.
وأبو حنيفة ﵀ عمل بحديث أبي هريرة: " من أكل ناسيا فليتم صومه " مع أن القياس عنده أنه يفطر، فترك القياس لخبر أبي هريرة.
وانظر ما كتبه العلامة محمد بخيت المطيعي في حاشيته " سلم الوصول " ٣ / ٧٦٧، ٧٦٩.