Praise belongs to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and peace and blessings be upon our master Muhammad

Abu Hanifa and legal evidence
 
 
As we read in 
The History of Baghdad
. Abu Hanifa said, “When I do not find the ruling in the Book of 
Allah or the 
Sunna
of the Messenger of Allah I can then take the statement of his Companions if I wish and 
leave those of other people. But I do not disregard their words for the words of anyone else. But when it is a 
question of Ibrahim an-Nakha’i, ash-Sha‘bi, al-Hasan, Ibn Sirin, or Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyab, then I can exercise 
ijtihad
in the same way that they did.” 
Al-Makki states in 
The Virtues
: “Abu Hanifa took what was reliable, avoided the unseemly, and 
investigated people’s behaviour and what was correct for them and was in their best interests. He used 
analogy for matters but, if analogy led to something unseemly, he used 
istihsan
if it was appropriate. If it was 
not appropriate, he referred to what the Muslims generally did. He used to attach himself to a known 
hadith
on which people were agreed and then form an analogy if that was possible. He would then use 
istihsan
and 
take whichever of them was more correct. Sahl said, ‘This knowledge of Abu Hanifa is, in fact, the knowledge 
of the common people.’” 
He also says, “Abu Hanifa investigated which 
hadiths
were abrogating and which abrogated and acted 
according to the 
hadith
when he considered it established from the Prophet via his Companions. He knew the 
hadiths
of the people of Kufa and was strong in following what he found in his land.” 
From these sources, we can see that the order of legal evidence used by Abu Hanifa was the Book, then the 
Sunna, then the statements of the Companions, then consensus, then analogy, then 
istihsan
and lastly custom. 
We will now have a brief look at these sources. 

---