[Zwnkkvle]

I think that's not true, not from a Fiqhi point of view, at least.

I remember having read some weeks ago an interesting article written by a Hanbali brother, who talked about this misunderstanding of Hanbali madhhab as the "strictest one".

He said that this view is due to a confusion:
Hanbali/Athari scholars had indeed been very "strict" and "harsh" in `Aqidah issues, because they had to face many persecutions and refute many deviations: this granted them this image of "strictness", but it's related to `Aqidah, not Fiqh.

While in Fiqh often you find the Hanbali school to be the MOST LAX (masah over socks, delaying prayer, and so on...)

And I say often because i strongly believe that there not exist such a thing like the "most liberal" school or the "strictest school": it depends on the issues discussed: in something one school is the hardest, in something else it's the "laxest".

Orientalist have always said that the Hanbali madhhab is the strictest one, and the Hanafi is the most "liberal": because they based their judgement on the USUL: since Hanbali usul are more strictly based on the texts, while the Hanafi madhhab contemplate great importance to Qiyas, they thought this automatically means that the former is "stricter" then the later, while in many issues the opposite is true, and Hanafi madhhab often results "stricter" than the Hanbali (beard and witr wajib, Sunnah prayers very insisted upon, not joining prayer in travel, masah on socks with certain conditions, and so on..).