The Genius Methodology Of Hanafi Jurisprudence
Hanafis & Flipping The Script
The location of foundational principles (usul ‘ammah) in Islamic jurisprudence significantly varies between schools. The majority of Sunni madhabs follow the usul, allowing them to shape the answers, while the Hanafis reverse the process: they trace the answer back to the usul. For this reason, some have incorrectly criticized the Hanafis, claiming, in contemporary terms, that they “cook the books,” “stack the deck,” or, contradict logic, putting themselves in a pickle by placing the egg before the chicken. Such criticism fails to recognize the history and context of the madhab’s early formation, specifically how it prioritizes its fiqh and how serious it took its role.
Dr. Muhyi al-Din Muhammad ‘Awamah responds to that critique against the Hanafis, writing that Hanafi scholars extracted universal principles of law (usūl) from their secondary judgments. They accomplished this by employing a thorough analysis of those judgments, identifying patterns and logic to scaffold their usul based on those opinions, and eventually aligning them: the usul with the furu’.
The rationale behind this approach is that the Hanafis knew that the legal answers and opinions they adhered to originated from the companions and the tabi’in. Consequently, there was no necessity for new ijtihad to generate fresh answers. Instead, the imperative was to safeguard the opinions inherited from the salaf—ensuring they remained preserved, protected, and defended. Thus, it was the established opinions that informed the usul, not the other way around.
That shows the genius reason why at times, the Hanafi approach is unique and practical.
Suhaib Webb
.