HanafiProofs

Some Muslim women want to work and use Khadījah (raḍiyallāhu ʿanhā) as their example, but they do not want to follow her in how she gave her wealth in support of her husband, the Prophet ﷺ. They also want to follow Western women in working full-time jobs, but they do not want to follow them when it comes to contributing to household expenses. Instead, they remember the Islamic ruling that it is the husband’s duty to provide, but forget that Islam also speaks about a wife’s duties in the marriage, such as serving her husband and not leaving the home without his permission. They refer to Islam when it suits them.

4 days ago | [YT] | 9

HanafiProofs

A Balanced Approach to the Madhāhib.

All of the recognised madhāhib are upon ḥaqq, meaning none of them are upon bāṭil. However, a follower of a particular madhhab should hold that his own madhhab is correct (ḥaqq) in its ijtihād, while considering the differing view of another madhhab to be a khataʾ fī al-ijtihād (an error in juristic reasoning), not bāṭil. At the same time, he must acknowledge the genuine possibility that his own madhhab may be mistaken in a given masʾalah, and that the opposing view may in fact be correct.
This principle is established by the statement of the Prophet ﷺ: “When a qualified scholar exercises ijtihād and is correct, he receives two rewards; and if he errs, he receives one reward.” This clearly indicates that an error in ijtihād does not invalidate the scholar, nor does it render his position bāṭil.
Therefore, it is impermissible to disparage or attack other madhāhib. Each madhhab may be correct or mistaken in a particular issue, yet as structured schools of law rooted in the Qurʾān, Sunnah, and the understanding of the early generations, all of the madhāhib are upon ḥaqq as a whole.
This balanced approach fosters unity and mutual respect among the madhāhib, in contrast to the attitude of some contemporary individuals who denounce or belittle those who follow a madhhab other than their own.

1 week ago | [YT] | 7

HanafiProofs

The night of the 15th of Shaʿbān has virtue, and it is recommended to spend at least part of the night in acts of worship such as voluntary ṣalāh, tasbīḥ, recitation of the Qurʾān, duʿāʾ, and charity.
However, fasting on the following day (the 15th of Shaʿbān) is not established through any authentic evidence. The narration that specifically encourages fasting on that day is very weak and cannot be relied upon.
That said, one may fast on that day without assigning it any special significance beyond the general virtue of fasting in Shaʿbān. The intention should be that the Prophet ﷺ used to fast abundantly in Shaʿbān, more than in any other month besides Ramaḍān, rather than fasting due to a specific virtue attached to that particular day.

1 week ago | [YT] | 10

HanafiProofs

Madhāhib are meant to develop naturally and organically. One should not proselytise for a particular madhhab or attempt to impose it on others. Especially in regions where a specific madhhab is already established, it is inappropriate to try to convert people to another. Rather, to preserve unity and avoid discord, one should adopt the local madhhab. This approach was also advocated by Ibn Taymiyyah (raḥimahullāh).

1 week ago | [YT] | 12

HanafiProofs

What is meant by taqlīd?
Taqlīd means that when there is a verse of the Qur’an or a ḥadīth whose meaning is not unanimously agreed upon—meaning that the Companions themselves differed regarding its interpretation—then if a mujtahid adopts one interpretation based on evidence, we place our trust in that mujtahid and accept his interpretation.
Thus, in reality, we are following the Qur’an and the Sunnah themselves, but not according to our own personal understanding; rather, we follow the interpretation preferred and adopted by a qualified and expert scholar.

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 10

HanafiProofs

*The Authenticity and Reliability of Abū Ḥanīfah’s Madhhab*


Whoever examines the matter carefully will find that the actions and statements of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, as transmitted through the Kufan school, received meticulous care at every level of transmission until they reached us—free from any doubt regarding a narrator in the chain, a narrator’s error, a shaykh’s tadlīs, textual or chain inconsistency, interruption, narration by meaning, or other issues that may occur in Prophetic ḥadīth. This is because they were transmitted through the great jurists—precise and reliable—at every level, whose number reached the level of tawātur, unlike reports transmitted through the paths of individual narrators and solitary chains (āḥād).

For this reason, we find that Imām Mālik (may Allah have mercy on him) did not give weight to a ḥadīth that contradicted the practice of the people of Madinah—not because the practice of the people of Madinah is given precedence over the words of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ (for no rational person would claim that), but rather because he sought to verify what was truly transmitted from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Ultimately, everyone refers back to him and is guided by his words. What was transmitted through mutawātir (mass transmission) paths of the actions and statements of the Prophet ﷺ from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) who resided in Madinah, and from the Tābiʿūn and those after them, is decisively stronger than what was transmitted through solitary reports from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, because a narrator may be affected by forgetfulness, error, alteration of meaning, and other issues that could be mentioned at length.

This very same principle applies fully to Kūfah. It was the capital of Islam after Madinah al-Munawwarah, and many great Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) settled there, taught its people jurisprudence, and the Tābiʿūn and those after them transmitted from them—at the forefront of whom was Imām Abū Ḥanīfah (may Allah have mercy on him), as previously mentioned.

This reality is evident to anyone engaged in the Ḥanafī school and its evidences. Every issue in which Abū Ḥanīfah differed from others and in which a ḥadīth was not available, we find that the same position was held by Ibn Masʿūd (may Allah be pleased with him), or ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (may Allah be pleased with him), or other Companions who settled in Kūfah. It was the established practice of the reliable jurists of the people of Kūfah, passed down continuously until it reached Imām Abū Ḥanīfah (may Allah have mercy on him). Thus, his reliance on this extensively transmitted report from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ sufficed him without the need for solitary ḥadīth reports in such matters

2 weeks ago | [YT] | 8

HanafiProofs

Proof for Hanafis that salah should not be combined.

كانَ رسولُ اللَّهِ صلَّى اللَّه عليه وسلم يصلِّي الصَّلاةَ لوقتِها ، إلاَّ بجمعٍ وعرفاتٍ

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ adhered to the prescribed times of the prayers, with the exception of combining them at Muzdalifah and ʿArafāt during Ḥajj. This was narrated by al-Nasāʾī and authenticated as ṣaḥīḥ by al-Nimāwī in Athārus sunan, as well as by al-Albānī.

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 8

HanafiProofs

Some people are misguided and end up misleading others as well. Unfortunately, many individuals follow blindly and are easily influenced.
If a scholar turns out to be unreliable, the correct approach is to seek another qualified scholar. Just as when one doctor proves incompetent, you look for a better doctor — you don’t go to a plumber for medical advice.
Similarly, if one scholar is exposed as false, you turn to a genuine scholar rather than to self-proclaimed figures.

3 weeks ago | [YT] | 9

HanafiProofs

*SUNNAH VS BID'AH*

There are certain individuals who place themselves at the forefront of declaring others mubtadi‘ (innovators), accusing people of committing bid‘ah. Ironically, many of these very individuals end up practicing some of the greatest innovations themselves.
If we take their own definition of bid‘ah – that it is anything which:
The Prophet ﷺ did not do,
The Sahabah did not do,
The Tabi‘een did not do,
Nor was practiced in the first three generations (which the Prophet ﷺ explicitly described as the best generations) –
then anything newly introduced into the religion which was absent during those generations must, by their own standard, be considered bid‘ah.
Furthermore, the Prophet ﷺ instructed us:
“Hold firmly to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Khulafa.”
So if a practice is not found in the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ or the Khulafa-e-Rashideen, and it is added to the religion as part of the deen, then by definition it becomes bid‘ah.
Yet, paradoxically, these same people are guilty of introducing such practices themselves.

*1. Khutbah in languages other than Arabic*
For example, delivering the khutbah in English or other languages instead of Arabic.
The Prophet ﷺ never did this.
The Sahabah never did this.
The Tabi‘een never did this.
No generation in the past 1400 years replaced Arabic khutbah with another language.
Despite this, some people now not only practice this but actively promote it. Even worse, they criticise those who adhere to the traditional Arabic khutbah, claiming it is “the need of the time.”
If “need of the time” becomes a valid justification, then any innovation can be legalised. Music, mixed gatherings, altering prayer – all could be justified under this slogan.
For something to be genuinely needed, it must have a foundation in the Sunnah or Athar. Interestingly, the need existed even during the time of the Sahabah and Tabi‘een when Islam spread rapidly across non-Arab lands – yet they never changed the khutbah language.

*2. Wiping over normal socks*
Another example is wiping over ordinary socks.
Where is the evidence from:
The Prophet ﷺ?
The Sahabah?
The Tabi‘een?
The four Imams?
Apart from a few isolated opinions centuries later, you will not find any firm precedent allowing unrestricted wiping over thin socks. This directly contradicts the inherited juristic tradition.

*3. Three talaq in one sitting*
Some now claim that issuing three talaq at once counts as only one.
But:
All four Imams unanimously held it counts as three.
Umar رضي الله عنه enforced it publicly.
The Sahabah witnessed it and no one objected – forming ijma‘.
Even Ibn ‘Abbas ultimately affirmed that three counts as three. The contrary view is held only by a small minority centuries later. So reviving this minority view and declaring it “Sunnah” is itself a bid‘ah.

*4. Taraweeh – eight rak‘ah claim*
Another claim is that Taraweeh should be limited to eight rak‘ahs.
Historically:
Umar رضي الله عنه established 20 rak‘ahs.
Sahabah prayed 20.
Tabi‘een prayed 20.
The entire Ummah practiced 20 for centuries.
No madhhab restricted Taraweeh to eight. Declaring twenty rak‘ahs bid‘ah today is historically false and methodologically flawed.

*Final point*
The real problem is methodological bid‘ah:
Ignoring scholarly consensus
Rejecting madhahib
Cherry-picking minority views
Branding centuries of scholarship as “wrong”
Then presenting all of this as “pure Sunnah.”
This is not following the Salaf – it is redefining Islam based on personal reasoning.

1 month ago | [YT] | 8

HanafiProofs

Imām al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī al-Shāfiʿī (d. 478 AH) said, verbatim:
“The doctrine of all the people of truth is that Allah, Glorified and Exalted, is transcendent above being confined by space and above being specified by directions.”

1 month ago | [YT] | 8