In the name of Allah[1], the All-Merciful, the Ever-Merciful. Peace and blessings of Allah be upon Prophet Muhammad (SAWS[2]).

The idea behind this program originated from the conflicts we are facing in our countries among the Muslims themselves.

Our intention throughout this program is derived from the following ayah[3] that says, what can be translated as, "Surely the believers are only brothers; so make a reconciliation between your two brothers…" (TMQ[4], 49:10). Another ayah that stresses this meaning, "…so be pious to Allah, and act righteously among yourselves (Or: make a reconciliation after differences…)" (TMQ, 8:1).

Our program tackles these points through learning about the four Imams of Islamic jurisprudence. We are honored to have a specialized scholar, Dr. Osama Refa'y, the Mufti[5] of A'kkar in Northern Lebanon, to discuss with us Imam Abu-Hanifa’s application of coexistence.

Imam Abu-Hanifa’s main characteristic was his concern with humanity and the dignity of humans. The humanity and dignity of humans was easily preserved by shari’ah (Islamic law)[6]. For example, the majority of scholars agreed upon confiscating the wealth of an incompetent person when he/she reaches 25 years of age. Imam Abu-Hanifa disagreed with them saying that a person is free in and is responsible for their actions and beliefs, and will be held accountable for this in the hereafter. Although scholars contradicted him, he believed that no stone should be left unturned in preserving the freedom, and dignity of man.

This point leads us to the issue of women in Abu-Hanifa's jurisprudence. How did he tackle the issues of women's freedom in getting married and holding the office of judge?

Imam Abu-Hanifa, may Allah bless his soul, regards women as an integral member of any society, fully competent to take action and bear the responsibility of these actions. For instance, his opinion is that if a rational mature woman wants to marry someone, then her guardian has no authority to deny her the legal right to choose her husband. He only has the right to object if the girl chooses to marry an ineligible suitor. Her decision is given precedence over her guardian’s according to the Islamic law. The Prophet (SAWS) acknowledged this right by saying that an unmarried woman is more entitled than her guardian to choose her husband.

In spite of the fact that the other Imams disagreed with Imam Abu-Hanifa regarding his opinion, yet their disagreement was not absolute. It is noted that al-Hanafy juristic school states that it is more appropriate for a woman not to personally fulfill the contract of her marriage so as not to be attributed to any sort of impudence. Meanwhile, a balance between the woman's wish and her father's should be struck.

I would like to emphasize that this is the opinion of Imam Abu-Hanifa, who lived in the year 80 A.H.[7] It is a clear proof for those who accuse Islam of denying the freedom of women that Islam infact preserved the rights of women.

Some people would say: ‘How can we learn about coexistance from the stories of the four Imams, while they themselves (the four imams) disputed over hundreds of issues?’

It is said that coexistence is accepting the other, but I cannot accept the other unless I have sound knowledge of his culture. Consequently, if we consider the four Imams as an integral image of Islamic unity and coexistence, we have to realize that the reasons for their differences in the issues of Islamic jurisprudence are justified. When anyone of us hears the justifications of the one opposing him, he will be convinced that he has his own reasons. It is then that we come to accept the other.

Speaking of differences, I would like to refer to the many youths who sometimes accept only one opinion and absolutely refuse to listen to other opinions.

This is one form of fanaticism. Fanaticism may be a blind-folded support to one school or may take the form of relentless opposition to other schools or sects.

The four Imams agreed upon all the issues related to the fundamentals of the Islamic creed, while they disagreed upon the branches of Islamic jurisprudence such as the detailed rules of prayers, fasting, …etc. Nevertheless, their disagreement is necessary and a mercy from Allah (AWJ[8]) on this ummah[9]. When a man came to write a book on the differences of the jurisprudents, Imam Ahmad asked him to call it the “Book of Abundance”.

Now, let us return to our major point; the reasons of the disagreements between the Imams. There are three main reasons. First, the nature of the human soul that varies from one person to the other. Indeed, people are different in their abilities, cultures, and styles. Second, the nature of the texts of the Glorious Qur'an and sunnah (the Prophet’s tradition), which may hold more than one meaning. Third, the differences which exist in customs and traditions.

To further apprehend the nature of the differences between the four imams, let us reflect on the Prophet’s (SAWS) words when he said that the buyer and the seller have the option of canceling or confirming the deal unless they separate.

Abu-Hanifa and Malik considered that the contract is fulfilled upon oral agreement. Meanwhile ash-Shafi'y and Imam Ahmad stipulated the physical separation of both contractors in order to consider the contract fully fulfilled. Abu-Hanifa then asked ash-Shafi'y, 'What if both of the contractors were in the same boat in the middle of the sea, how come they get separated physically?' ash-Shafi'y then reconsidered his view of the hadith[10] based on Abu-Hanifa's logical interpretation.’

I want to emphasize that even though they were discussing the same hadith; each one of them had a different view for the word 'separated'. This accentuates the flexibility and tolerance of Islam.

Precisely, ash-Shafi'y even suggested a rule to reduce the consequences of dispute. He said: ' Islamic jurists have agreed that Allah (SWT) does not enforce punishment because of a debatable issue'. Similarly, Omar Ibn-Abdul-Aziz, the renowned caliph, and his successors emphasized this rule by announcing: 'If you see a man practice a debatable issue, upon which you do not agree, do not forbid him form practicing it.’

That is why when ash-Shafi'y visited Abu-Hanifa's grave; he did not practice his own view of raising up his hands with dua'a (supplication). Instead, he practiced Abu-Hanifa's method, and hence respecting his view in this regard.

Correct. Here is another example. When Abu-Hanifa met Imam Malik in Madinah to discuss some juristic issues, Layth Ibn-Saad (one of the followers of Imam Malik) asked him about their weary discussion. Imam Malik answered: 'I was debating a man whose logic could easily convince you'. Similarly, when Abu-Hanifa was asked about Imam Malik he said: 'I've been conversing with a mountain of knowledge.’

Indeed; this encourages all of us to follow suit. I recall when Imam Ahmad Ibn-Hanbal suggested that the basmallah[11] should never be spoken out loud except in Madinah, in which Muslims speak it out loud, out of respect of their practice and for reconciliation.

Moreover, when Abu-Yusuf (a follower of Abu-Hanifa) came along with the Abbassid caliph to Madinah, the caliph did hijamah[12], a practice that Abu-Hanifa considers a nullifier of ablution. The caliph followed the view of Imam Malik that such an act does not spoil the ablution. Yet, Abu-Yusuf respected Imam Malik's view and was led by the caliph in prayer.

Another example is when al-'Andaliyy (one of the followers of Imam Ahmad) related a discussion between Imam Ahmad and Ali-Ibnul-Madiniyy (a distinguished scholar). In that discussion, Imam Ahmad insisted that each one of the ten, who were promised jannah (paradise) by the Prophet (SAWS) in his hadith, will unquestionably enter the jannah. While al-Madinyyi disputed this point and believed that their entering the jannah should not be considered a given, as they were yet to await the grant of Allah. Al-'Andaliyy said: 'They were conversing so loudly that I thought they would fight'. After the discussion had ended, Imam Ahmad then held Ibnul-Madiniyy's hand and told him: "Haven't we been joined by our brotherhood even though we've disagreed?”

Can we have a closer look regarding the difficulties that Abu-Hanifa faced in his defense of the Islamic creed?

Imam Abu-Hanifa was a key factor by which Allah (SWT) helped the Sunni Muslims of Iraq to stand firm in such a sectarian and conflict-filled ambiance. He indulged in debates with people of different juristic schools of thought as well as al-Khawarij [13](the dissenters) and al- Murji'ah[14] especially in Kufah.

He was firm in his faith. He used his logical interpretations of the sunnah (the Prophet’s tradition) in his debates with such misguided sects instead of the Qur'an; as he emphasized that they interpreted it in a wrong way. He asked his followers not to argue with any group regarding creed-related issues.

A group of al-Khawarij once asked Abu-Hanifa about the validity of performing the funeral prayer on a Muslim whom they killed unjustly, claiming that he was a renegade. They wanted Abu-Hanifa to issue a verdict contradicting theirs, in order to justify executing Imam Abu-Hanifa. Abu-Hanifa realized this and asked them whether the man was a Jewish, a Christian, or a Muslim and their answer was "A Muslim." Abu-Hanifa then answered with ease, 'Then you have answered your question yourselves!'

He was a brilliant speaker who studied the laws of speech. Another group of Khawarij asked him about the validity of arbitration (regarding the famous dispute between Imam Ali and Mu'awiyah). He then answered: ‘Since we are discussing this issue, isn’t it rational that we assign a judge between us in case we keep arguing about it and fail to come to an agreement?' They answered, 'Yes'. Abu-Hanifa then again responded, 'Then you have answered yourselves!

The learned lessons from the life of Abu-Hanifa are numerous. One important lesson is that we must be firm regarding the fundamentals of the tenets of faith while the branches’ interpretation allows more flexibility and broadness. Is there anything more you wish to add, Sheikh?

We deduce that being steadfast with our Islamic creed does not imply that we do not coexist. Coexistence is a lesson we learn from the life of the Prophet (SAWS). Having different juristic schools of thought is a blessing from Allah (AWJ). Disagreement is acceptable if done within the frame of fraternity.

Let us end our episode with this wonderful statement by Abu-Hanifa describing his real attitude towards those who disagree with him when he said: ‘O Allah! Let our hearts be tolerant of those who bear grudge against us’.

[1] The word Allah is the Arabic term for God. Although the use of the word "Allah" is most often associated with Islam, it is not used exclusively by Muslims; Arab Christians and Arabic-speaking Jews also use it to refer to the One God. The Arabic word expresses the unique characteristics of the One God more precisely than the English term. Whereas the word "Allah" has no plural form in Arabic, the English form does. Allah is the God worshipped by all Prophets, from Adam to Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad.

[2] SAWS= Salla Allah alayhe Wa Salam [All Prayers and Blessings of Allah be upon him].

[3] Ayah= A verse in the Qur'an.

[4] TMQ= Translation of the Meaning of the Qur'an. This translation is for the realized meaning, so far, of the stated (Surah:Ayah) of the Qur'an. Reading the translated meaning of the Qur'an can never replace reading it in Arabic, the language in which it was revealed.

[5] Mufti= An Islamic scholar who is an interpreter of Islamic law, and is entitled to issue fatwas (legal opinions).

[6] Shari’ah = The ethical and moral code based on the Qur'an and sunnah (the Prophet’s tradition).

[7] A.H= After hijrah of the Prophet (SAWS) from Makkah to Madinah in 622 A.D.

[8] AWJ= Aza-Wa-Jal [Glorified and Sublime be He].

[9] Ummah= Muslim nation.

[10] Hadith= The Prophet’s (SAWS) actual sayings or actions as narrated by his companions

[11] Basmallah= In the name of Allah, The All-Merciful, The Ever-Merciful

[12] Hijamah is an Arabic term for cupping.

[13] A group of people who rebelled against Ali Ibn-Abu-Taleb (RA) after he had acceped arbitration, and finally assassinated him (RA)

[14] An early Islamic school. They advocated the idea of "delayed judgement". Some of their beliefs contradict the Sunni beliefs.