What is the Madhab among the Hanābila? Buhūtī's synopsis

Imām al-Buhūtī, Abū’l-Sa’ādāt Mansūr bin Yūnus bin Salāh ul-Dīn bin Hasan bin Ahmad bin Alī bin Idrīs al-Buhūtī al-Hanbalī (d1051hijri!l) who is described as to whom the fatwa ends by the scholars of the school, clarifies his exposition of the Hanbali Madhab in his work “Irshād Ūl ul-Nuhā li-Daqā’iq al-Muntaha”, a marginalia on the “Muntaha al-Iradāt” of the major Hanbalī jurist of tbe later school, Ibn ul-Najjār, in his marginilia:

“ “Upon the Madhab of Imām...”

The madhab in origin is: suitable for a place, a time, and a source, then it’s meaning was changed to mean (nuqila): what is said by a jurist (Mujtahid) with evidence (Dalīl) and he dies upon that view. Ibn Muflih said in his “Usūl” “the madhab of a person is his view or what it follows it (jara majrāhu) either by indicating its rationale (tanbīh) or otherwise”. End quote.

Point of benefit (fā'ida): know that Imām Ahmad (ra) never authored a comprehensive seperate work of Fiqh, so his Madhab is taken from his responsa, some of his writings on other than fiqh at times, and his statements and actions.

What is derived by analogy (muqīs) from his statements (kalām) is his madhab according to what is most sound (asah).

And what he is alone in (anfarad bihi) in some of the reports but has strong evidence (qawwi ul-dalīl) that is his madhab according to what is most sound (asah).

Or what he responded to by citing the Book (Kitāb) or the Sunnah, or a consensus (ijmā) or a statement of one of the companions (qawl ul-sahābī), then that is also his madhab - as the statement of a companion is a proof (hujja) for him, according to what is most sound (asah).

Or what he narrates from the Sunnah or a report (athar) and states it is sound (sahhahu) or states it is good (hassana) or is pleased with its chain (sanad) or documents in his writings (kutub) and doesn’t refute [it], nor give fatwa in contradiction to it, then this is also his madhab according to the the soundest view (asah) and the preferred view of the majority (akthar).

And when he relates a view with its evidence then later disagrees with it, the second is his madhab, this is the preferred view (akhtāruhu) in “al-Tamhīd” [of Abīl Khattāb al-Kalwadhānī v4 page 370], “al-Rawda” [of Muwaffaq ul-Dīn Ibn Qudāma v2 page 378], “al-Udda” [although some copies state Umda most likely what is intended is Udda of Qādī Abū Ya’la according to the editor v5 page 1617] and other than as put forward in the “Ri’āya” [of Ibn Hamdān page 88].

When 2 views are transmitted from him, which differ in 2 different times, and it is not possible to reconcile (jam) them, in such a scenario if the dating (tarīkh) of both is known, then the second is the madhab; if not then it is what is closest to the Book and the Sunnah or a report (athar), or his principles (qawā’id), or objectives (maqāsid), or evidences.

What if one of the views agrees with another madhab, what is preferred? It is stated in “Ri’āya”, “both are possible views (waj’hayn)”. It was stated in “al-Insāf” [of al-Mardāwī], “I say: what is preferred is what is congruent with it.” End of quote.

If it is possible to reconcile them (jam) by carrying the general (ām) over the specific (khās) or the unrestricted (mutlaq) by the restricted (muqayyad), then both of them are his madhab, according to what is most correct (asah).”

Pages 55-57

“[Ibn ul-Najjār:] And I do not mention a view (qawl) save what is put forward or as sound (sahīh) except if action is according to it (alayh al-amal) or it is popular (shuhra), or that the difference (khilāf) is strong (quwwi).”

[Buhūtī:] so his saying “action is according to it” i.e. the people and/or the rulers/judges (hukkām) act according to it, to exposit that, and to make apparent that their action is according to what is considered the preferred over view (marjūh).

And his saying “popular” i.e. it was considered popular some of the Companions (ashāb [the riwayāt or a waj’h [narrations from Ahmad or a solid conclusion of one of the companions — editor’s footnote*].

His saying “the difference is strong” i.e. this is due to the difference in determining what was correct (ikhtilāf ul-tas’hīh) of the companions (as’hāb), and those who authenticated it didn’t reach the level of those that considered the first view correct with much verification. [The editor gives the example that phrases such as Aqwa ul-Wajhayn or the stronger of the two viewpoints would be mentioned indicating both are strong as some had viewed both as correct (sahīh).]

To complete (tattima): the differences (ikhtilāf) between the companions (ashāb) [of the madhab], surely arise as a result of the strength of the evidences (quwwat ul-dalīl) from each of their perspectives. And everyone who takes the respective view from the views of the Imām is followed (yuqtada bihī) and it is allowed to make taqlīd of them and act by their statement; and that in most cases is itself the madhab of the Imām. As stated in “al-Insāf”.”

Page 58

Taken from “Irshād Ūl ul-Nuhā li-Daqā’iq al-Muntahā — Hāshiya alā Muntahā ‘l-Irādāt” by Shaykh al-Muhaqiq Abī’l-Sa’ādāt Mansūr bin Yūnus bin Salāh ul-Dīn al-Buhūtī al-Hanbalī d1051Hijri, edited [Tahqīq] by Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Muhammad al-Abbād, published by Dar Atlas, Riyadh — Saudi Arabia, 2021CE — 1442H

*this explanation is the same given by and defined here from al-Mardāwī in his introduction to his major work “al-Insāf”.