[Thread 🧵]
I’ll be going through some of ʻUthmān ibn Fārūq’s clips on fiqh.
Disclaimer: I will be defending a position I myself do not hold.
I’ll be going through some of ʻUthmān ibn Fārūq’s clips on fiqh.
Disclaimer: I will be defending a position I myself do not hold.
[1] In this video, he was trying to prove that the Ḥanafī scholars admitted that rafʻ al-yadayn is a Sunnah. He starts by quoting ibn ʼAbī al-ʻIzz al-Ḥanafī, mispronouncing his name as ʼAbū al-ʻIzz.
When it comes to the actual maḏhab, ibn ʼAbī al-ʻIzz’s opinions aren’t given much weight. I couldn’t even find his biography in any of the books of the maḏhab.
[2] Here, he quotes ʼImām ash-Shawkānī on rafʻ al-yadayn.
Using ʼImām ash-Shawkānī isn’t ideal because he’s the last thing from being a Ḥanafī. He inclines towards the Ẓāhirī maḏhab
[3] He then cites ʻAbd ul-Ḥayy al-Laknawī which he mispronounces as ʼAbū al-Hayy.
What he first quotes is the words of as-Suyūṭī. The second thing he quotes is the author’s conclusion, that rafʻ al-yadayn is not a sunnah muʼakkadah. Both sides have proof, but the proof for leaving it off is usually weak except for what was narrated from ibn Masʻūd.
I checked his book on fiqh, and I saw no mention of rafʻ al-yadayn. Perhaps he viewed it as mubāḥ in the end.
[4] ʻUthmān ibn Fārūq then properly quotes Shāh Walīullah.
Despite Shāh Walīullah doing tarjīḥ of this opinion, it wouldn’t mean it’s the muʻtamad of the maḏhab. There are principles to establish the muʻtamad, and with the case of the Ḥanafī maḏhab, you aren’t going to leave of centuries of scholarship for one scholar.
[5] He appeals to ibn al-Humām, not ibn Hamām.
Keep in mind that al-Laknawī earlier conceded that ibn al-Humām was against rafʻ al-yadayn.
Ibn al-Humām was simply citing other opinions. If he had read everything, he would’ve realized that this wasn’t actually his view.
Ibn al-Humām was simply citing other opinions. If he had read everything, he would’ve realized that this wasn’t actually his view.
[6] Here, he quotes ʼAbū al-Ḥasan as-Sindī.
ʼAbū al-Ḥasan as-Sindī was a muḥaddith, and he’s simply strengthening these reports. The Ḥanafī arguments to deny raising the hands don’t rely on the authenticity of these reports.
Why doesn’t he present the actual Ḥanafī arguments against rafʻ al-yadayn from aṭ-Ṭaḥāwī, as-Sarkhasī, al-Marghīnānī, ibn ʻĀbidīn, etc.? There’s a methodology in giving rulings, and this video isn’t doing justice to the maḏhab.
[7] Do see ʼAbū Zayd’s video below to see more issues.
I realized I was a bit ambiguous here, as-Sindī is also a great faqīh رحمه الله.
Loading suggestions...