THE GROWTH OF LEGAL TRADITIONS 141

doctrine they were intended to support, as soon as they were put into circulation.

Traditions later than Ḥasan Baṣrī

Although the dogmatic treatise of Ḥasan Baṣrī¹ is not concerned with matters of law, it is appropriate to begin with it, because it shows that even dogmatic traditions which are, generally speaking, earlier than legal ones, hardly existed at the time of its composition, that is, in the later part of the first century A.H. There is no trace of traditions from the Prophet, and the author states explicitly: 'Every opinion which is not based on the Koran, is erroneous.'

Tradition originating between "Ibrāhīm Nakha'ī" and Ḥammād

Āthār A. Y. 206: Abū Ḥanīfa—Ḥammād—Ibrāhīm—Ibn Masʿūd did not follow a certain practice. Āthār Shaib. 37: Abū Ḥanīfa—Ḥammād—Ibrāhīm did not follow it; the same is related from Ibn Masʿūd. But there is a tradition from the Prophet to the contrary. Āthār A. Y. 207: Abū Ḥanīfa—Ḥammād—ʿAbdalkarīm²—with an isnād going back to the Prophet, that he did follow it. Athar Shaib. 37: Shaibānī—ʿUmar b. Dharr Ḥamdānī—his father—Saʿīd b. Jubayr—Ibn ʿAbbās—Prophet: a tradition in favour of the practice, polemically directed against the other opinion. The same tradition with another Iraqian isnād occurs in Tr. II, 19 (t).

It will be shown that the name of Ibrāhīm Nakha'ī is often a label for the ancient Iraqian doctrine.³ This and the then recently produced tradition from the Prophet to the contrary were transmitted by Ḥammād to Abū Ḥanīfa, and the tradition from the Prophet soon acquired better isnāds.

Traditions originating between "Ibrāhīm Nakha'ī" and Abū Ḥanīfa

A certain tradition from the Prophet is unknown to Ibrāhīm (Āthār Shaib. 22), known to Abū Ḥanīfa without isnād (Āthār A.Y. 251), and appears with a full isnād in Muw. i. 275; Muw. Shaib. 122; Tr. II, 19 (g) and in the classical collections.⁴

For another example, see above, p. 60. It has been shown there that certain traditions from the Prophet on a question of ritual were as yet unknown to Ibrāhīm, but that one version in favour of a certain practice was followed by Shāfi'ī. Another version which, by implica-