Abu Hurayra Abu Hurayra (r)
Salam `alaykum, May Allah reward you for this useful post. I will add some remarks related to the topic of corrections of the Companions by the Mother of the Believers, may Allah be well-pleased with them all:(4) ‘Aa’ishah – radiyallahu ‘anha– never accused Aboo Hurayrah of lying. However, there do exist a number of incidents where she corrected Aboo Hurayrah for erring in the hadeeth he transmitted. This was not unique for Aboo Hurayrah, but rather ‘Aa’ishah corrected a number of the Companions. Imaam al-Zarkashee (794 A.H.) has gathered and commented upon all the statements wherein which ‘Aa’ishah corrected another of the Prophet’s companions in his al-Ijaba li Irad ma Istadraakahu ‘Aa’ishah ‘ala -Sahaabah. Yes, al-Zarkashi in that valuable book shows that some of `A’isha’s corrections were correct and some incorrect. For example, her position on Isra’ and Mi`raj (as involving only the spirit and not the body of the Prophet sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) was not retained.Of these criticisms by ‘Aa’ishah, there exists one in Saheeh Muslim (Cairo: Vol. 3, p. 137). Specifically that Aboo Hurayrah related that the individual who at dawn (fajr) is in a state of sexual defilement, he is not permitted fast. When ‘Aa’ishah and Umm Salamah were questioned regarding this they informed that the Prophet – – during the month of Ramadan would awake at dawn in a state of sexual defilement not due to a dream (i.e., due to having sexual relations) and fast. When Aboo Hurayrah was later questioned as to his source, he informed that he heard that from al-Fadl ibn ‘Abbas and not the Prophet – sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam – directly. Yes, and Abu Hurayra then understood the meaning of al-Fadl’s narration in figurative terms while he understood that of `A’isha in absolute terms as mentioned by Imam al-Nawawi in Sharh Sahih Muslim and others. The terms understood figuratively from al-Fadl’s narration are that (1) it is better to perform ghusl before fajr, but Rasulullah saws showed us that it is permitted to delay ghusl until after fajr enters; (2) intercourse after fajr nullifies the fast; and (3) al-Fadl’s narration used to hold but was then abrogated, as mentioned by al-Zarkashi. Al-Nawawi also said that for these reasons Abu Hurayra took back this narration after he heard that of `A’isha and Umm Salama. I should also point out that Brother Saeed’s translation needs amending: NOT “would awake at dawn in a state of [junub]” BUT “would reach dawn in a state of [junub]” where the disputed translation stands for “yusbihu.” The point being that the context may be not sleep but intercourse as per the verse {wabashiruhunna} (and cohabit with them and eat and drink until dawn). This said, asbaha is also commonly translated as “to wake up” wallahu ta`ala a`lam.(5) As for Abu Haneefah’s rejecting the narrations of these three companions. However, what does exists is a principle of Usool al-Fiqh among the Hanafee scholars that those narrations of Aboo Hurayrah which are in agreement with analogy (al-qiyaas) are adopted, and what is in disagreement with analogy, one sees if the hadeeth has been accepted by the ummah, only then it is adopted; otherwise analogy is adopted in preference to hadeeth. (See Usool al-Sarkhasee, Vol. 1, p. 341) What is famous about the Hanafi madhhab and the position of its Imam radiyallahu `anh, is that the weak hadith is preferred to juridical opinion (ra’y), and qiyas here is ra’y. Second, Imam Abu Hanifa also said that if a position comes from one of the Companions generally speaking, he submits to it. It is only when there is a conflict of evidence and/or interpretation of some sort that he becomes very strict with ahad narrations and those conveyed by “non-fuqaha'” versus “fuqaha'” among the Companions. Otherwise, you will find that Abu Hanifa narrated plentifully in his Musnad from Abu Hurayra (22 narrations), Anas (20 narrations), and others of the so-called non-fuqaha’ of the Companions.The source of this principle is the Kufan scholar of the tabi’een, Ibraaheem an-Nakha’ee, who would not adopt all the hadeeth of Aboo Hurayrah. Al-Dhahabi in his Mizaan al-I’tidaal (Vol. 1, p. 35) reports that an-Nakha’ee explained his motivations by arguing that Aboo Hurayrah was not a scholar of fiqh (faqeeh). In response, it should be noted: (a.) a number of scholars have objected to al-Nakha’i’s position. Among whom ath-Thahabi, Ibn Katheer and Ibn ‘Asaakir. (See ath-thahabi, Siyaar A’laam al-Nubalaa’, Vol. 2, p. 438 and Ibn Katheer,al-Bidaayah wan-Nihaayah, Vol. 8, pp. 109-110); But none of these is of the Usuliyyin in the Hanafi madhhab! The discussion of this issue no doubt must be left to the Ahl al-Madhhab as is the rule for questions of usul as well as fiqh. Not al-`Izzee, and even less al-Mu`allami who is a rabid enemy of the Hanafi School as shown by his book al-Tankil.(b.) Ibn ‘Abbas who is recognized as a faqeeh, once in a gathering says to Aboo Hurayrah, “Give a fatwa O Aboo Hurayrah;” This is only a proof that in a particular question Ibn `Abbas deferred to Abu Hurayra, and in fact may be the exception that confirms the rule, especially if there is only a single example of it, wallahu a`lam. (c.) For 23 years, after the death of ‘Uthmaan – radiyallahu ‘anhu – Aboo Hurayrah would deliever fatawa in al-Madeenah. (See Tabaqaat Ibn Sa’d, Vol. 2, p. 372). There are no objections by anyone to Aboo Hurayrah’s knowledge of fiqh. Moreover, most of Aboo Hurayrah’s students among the tabi’in where accomplished scholars and judges. (d.) Incomparing, the instances where an-Nakha’ee did not adopt the narration of Aboo Hurayrah, we find that Aboo Hurayrah’s narration is stronger than the opinion forwarded by an-Nakha’ee. (see al-‘Izzee, pp. 237-248) The Ahl al-Fatwa among the Companions are well-known, and also well-known is the fact that Sayyidina Abu Hurayra was not counted among them even if we now possess a sizeable sample of his fiqh and fatawa. Note from the above evidence that before the death of Sayyidina `Uthman and the departure of Sayyidina `Ali for Kufa (where he established the seat of his Khilafa), Abu Hurayra refrained from giving fatwa. So then when there was a void he stepped in and filled it. Even so, what is more established is that he NARRATED hadith for 23 years in Madina, not that he gave fatwa. The sources show that his gatherings were gatherings of tahdith, not gatherings of fiqh like Ibn `Abbas. Wallahu a`lam. was-salam
