Abu Jahl said, "If I see the Messenger of Allah ﷺ praying at the Kaabah, I will go to him and trample on his neck."Ibn Abbas said, "Had he done so, the angels would have seized him in plain sight. If the Jews had wished for death, they would have died and seen their places in the Fire. And had those who came to engage the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in mutual imprecation gone through with it, they would have returned to find neither wealth nor family."
حدثنا إسماعيل بن يزيد الرقي أبو يزيد حدثنا فرات عن عبد الكريم عن عكرمة
قال أبو جهل لئن رأيت رسول الله ﷺ يصلي عند الكعبة لآتينه حتى أطأ على عنقه قال فقال لو فعل لأخذته الملائكة عيانا ولو أن اليهود تمنوا الموت لماتوا ورأوا مقاعدهم في النار ولو خرج الذين يباهلون رسول الله ﷺ لرجعوا لا يجدون مالا ولا أهلا
Its isnad is sahih. Ismail bin Yazid Abu Yazid Raqqi is among the shaykhs of Ahmad, and Ibn Jawzi mentioned him among them. Hafiz gave his biography in al-Tajil, 38, and quoted from Husayni, who said, "There is obscurity regarding him," but then corrected himself by noting that he is known, that he is attributed to his grandfather, and that he is given a biography in al-Tahdhib under the name Ismail bin Abdullah bin Yazid Raqqi, judge of Damascus. But what appears in al-Tahdhib is Ismail bin Abdullah bin Khalid bin Yazid, 1:307. I believe this is an error, and that this man is not the same as that one.First, the one in al-Tahdhib has the kunya Abu Abdullah, and it is also said Abu Hasan, whereas the one here has the kunya Abu Yazid, as Imam Ahmad explicitly stated. Second, the one given a biography in al-Tahdhib is later, among the shaykhs of Ibn Majah, and died after the year 240. Third, the one here narrates from Furat bin Salman by direct hearing, and Furat died in the year 150. How then could he have met him and heard from him? Perhaps the shaykh of Ahmad meant the one in al-Tahdhib, but regardless, these are two different men. Ahmad was careful about his shaykhs and would only narrate from a trustworthy one, and it is on that basis that we have graded his hadith as sahih.Furat is Ibn Salman Hadrami Jazari Raqqi, and he is trustworthy. Ahmad deemed him trustworthy, and Bukhari gave him a biography in al-Kabir, 129/1/4, without mentioning any criticism of him.Abdul-Kareem is Ibn Malik Jazari. Ibn Kathir mentioned this hadith in his tafsir, 2:156, quoting from this very source, but there it appears as Qurrah instead of Furat, which is an error. He said, "Bukhari, Tirmidhi, and Nasai have narrated it from the hadith of Abdul-Razzaq, from Mamar, from Abdul-Kareem, with this same chain." Tirmidhi said, "Hasan sahih." He also mentioned it in the same work, 9:248, and referred to it in 1:235. He mentioned the part relating to Abu Jahl in al-Tarikh, 3:43–44.In manuscript h it reads "Furat bin Abdul-Kareem," which is an error we have corrected based on manuscript k, on Ibn Kathir, and on the biographical sources.