The Term “al-Imām al-Thālith” in Ḥanafī Fiqh Books

By Mln. Abrar Habib (Takmīl Graduate, 2019)

While studying the Ḥanafī Madhhab, one will come across technical terminology. Three terms that one will occasionally come across are “al-thālith,” “al-imām al-thālith,” and “al-imām al-rabbānī.” These terms have specific meanings. They all refer to Imām Muḥammad. Examples of the Ḥanafīs using them will be presented.

The following are a few examples of the term “al-thālith” and “al-imām al-thālith”:

(1)

ومسألة البئر الخلافية يضبطها حروف جحط أو بخط روي ذلك عن أبي علي في غاية البيان وهي مصورة في جنب أو محدث انغمس لطلب الدلو أو للتبرد مستنجيا بالماء ولا نجاسة عليه قال في الخلاصة والمحيط ولم يتدلك وأشار بالجيم إلى ما قال الإمام أنهما نجسان وبالحاء إلى ما قال الثاني من كلا منهما بحاله وبالطاء إلى ما قال الثالث من طهارة الماء والرجل واختلف في نجاسة الرجل على قول الإمام فقيل للجنابة فلا يقرأ قالوا وهو الأصح

In a purification issue, when explaining an acronym that Nasafī used in Kanz, ʿUmar b. al-Nujaym stated that when Nasafī wrote ط he was alluding to al-thālith’s opinion; when an individual submerges himself in a well, the water and the person will both be ruled pure.[1]

If one reviews this issue in other manuals of fiqh, he will notice that the fuqahāʾ clearly state that Imām Muḥammad held this opinion. Imām Muḥammad’s own work, al-Aṣl, also conveys that this was his opinion.[2]

(2)

حلف لا يحج فعلى الصحيح منه فلا يحنث بالفاسد ولا يحنث حتى يقف بعرفة عن الثالث أي محمد

In his Tanwīr al-Abṣār wa Majmaʿ al-Biḥār, Tumurtāshī stated that if one takes an oath that he will not perform Ḥajj, we will take a valid Ḥajj fulfilling all its requisites into consideration when determining if he breached his oath or not.

In his commentary al-Durar al-Muntaqā, Haṣkafī further explains that an invalid Ḥajj will not constitute oathbreach.

Tumurtāshī then states that according to “al-thālith,” this individual will not be considered as someone who has breached his oath until he performs wuqūf at ʿĀrafah.

Ḥaṣkafī after that clarifies that Imām Muḥammad was intended by “al-thālith.”[3]

(3)

وليعلم أن الطالب إذا أبرأ الأصيل بعد وفاته من الدين أو وهبه له وعلى رأي الإمام الثالث الإمام محمد أن الإبراء والهبة ينفذان وليس للورثة حق القبول أو الرد فيهما رد المحتار

In Durar al-Ḥukām, it is stated that when the ṭālib absolves the debt of the aṣīl after his demise or gifts it to him, according to “al-imām al-thālith” the pardoning of the debt and gifting will be effective immediately. The inheritors will not have the right to accept nor deny either; it is automatically inherited.

In his commentary Durar al-Ḥukām, ʿAlī Ḥaydar clarifies that “al-imām al-thālith” refers to Imām Muḥammad.[4]

As for the term “al-imām al-rabbānī,” in my limited research, I did not find it used for Imām Muḥammad, as some later scholars have suggested. In every example that I have found, the author always states Imām Muḥammad’s name after using this title. It is more accurately a title used for Imām Muḥammad and not a term. Nevertheless, here are two examples of the usage of this title:

(1)

قال الإمام الرباني محمد بن الحسن الشيباني جواز إجارة الظئر دليل على فساد بيع لبنها

In al-Baḥr al-Rāʾiq, Ibn Nujaym quotes Imām Muḥammad concerning a juristic ruling where Imām Muḥammad states that the permissibility of renting out the services of a wet nurse is proof that selling her milk will be incorrect.  When saying Imām Muḥammad’s name, he adds the title “al-imām al-rabbānī” before his name.[5]

(2)

فإن الإمام الرباني محمد بن الحسن الشيباني لم يضع تلك المسألة في السير من غير تحقيق، خصوصا،

When discoursing a lengthy discussion on a principle based on the legal maxim: “al-yaqīn lā yazūlu bi al-shakk,” Ḥamawī adds the title “al-imām al-rabbānī” before Imam Muḥammad’s name.[6]

And Allāh knows best.

[1] al-Nahr al-Fāʾiq, 1:180.

[2] al-Aṣl, 1:66.

[3] al-Durr al-Mukhtār, 307.

[4] Durar al-Aḥkām Sharḥ Majjalat al-Aḥkām, 1:711.

[5] al-Baḥr al-Rāʾiq, 6:87.

[6] Ghamz ʿUyūn al-Baṣāʾir, 1:86.