ভূমিকা

Shiavault - a Vault of Shia Islamic Books Misbah-uz-Zulam, Roots of the Karbala’ Tragedy A Few Examples of Abu Hanifah’s Analogy (No. 1) It is a well known fact that according to Abu Hanifah, the skin of a dog becomes pure after tanning[^1] and one can pray in it and if one wants to bind the Quran in it, one could do so. This shows that Abu Hanifah did not consider a dog to be unclean. It would have been better if pig skin had also become pure after tanning.

If this were possible, it would have been very useful today. The best quality of saddles are made only from pigskins, whereas today’s generation of Muslims are averse to its use. (No. 2) A dog skin dipped in a filthy impurity is allowed for prayers, as Qaffal prayed wearing such a skin in the presence of Sultan Mahmood Ghazanvi.

This matter was recorded by Imam Yafaee in Miratul Jinan and Ibn Khallikan has written about it in his book, Wafayatul Ayan quoting from Mugheesul Khalq of Imamul Harmain, Abu Maali Juwaini. We should know that this prayer was recited according to the interpretations of Abu Hanifah’s religion. It is a long story, and since it is extremely despicable, the writer is not repeating it. By casting a fleeting glance at all the basic fundamentals of prayers etc.

we come to know that such prayers with its intention and ablution is the result of Imam’s dependence on personal opinion and analogy. (No. 3) According to Kitabul Hidaya and Sharhe Waqaya, Abu Hanifah has permitted drinking of fermented beverage of dates and wine prepared from dry raisins, if one does not become intoxicated.

In the same way, it is mentioned in Fatwa Alamgir that if a person drinks nine cups of date wine and does not become intoxicated and if he drinks the tenth cup and becomes intoxicated, he would not be eligible for the prescribed penalty. Abu Hanifah has also permitted ablution with date wine. Obviously, all these verdicts of Abu Hanifah, were due to his dependence on personal opinion and analogy; and as a matter of fact are against Quranic laws.

Due to such exercise of personal opinion by Abu Hanifah, some of the followers of his school also consider berry wine permissible. (No. 4) According to the marginal notes of Sharhe Waqaya, Abu Hanifah considers the amount paid to a prostitute as lawful for her. In the same way, it is proved from Fatawa Qadi Khan and Kanzul Daqaiq that a man who pays for adultery is not liable for punishment.