Ahmad 6723

Its isnad is daif due to the vagueness of the trustworthy narrator whom Malik reported from, but the hadith itself is sahih, since it has also come through a connected chain identifying this trustworthy narrator, as will be shown. It appears in the Muwatta (209, Fuad Abdul-Baqi edition) as, from Malik, from the trustworthy narrator with him, from Amr bin Shuayb. Ibn Abdul-Barr mentioned it in Taqassi (no. 786) and said, "This is how Yahya reported it from Malik in this hadith, from the trustworthy narrator with him, from Amr bin Shuayb, from his father, from his grandfather. A group followed him in this, among them Ibn Abdul-Hakam. Qanabi, Tinnisi, and a group reported it from Malik as, it reached him from Amr bin Shuayb, from his father, from his grandfather." Whether he said "from the trustworthy narrator with him" or "it reached him," it makes no difference, because he would not take from or narrate except from a trustworthy source. People have discussed the identity of this trustworthy narrator with Malik in this passage, as we have mentioned in its proper place in the book Tamhid.Abu Dawud likewise reported it (3502, 3:302 Awn al-Mabud) from Abdullah bin Maslama, who said, "I read to Malik that it reached him from Amr bin Shuayb." Ibn Majah likewise reported it (102) from Hisham bin Ammar, "Malik bin Anas narrated to us, saying, It reached me from Amr bin Shuayb." Bayhaqi likewise reported it in Sunan al-Kubra (5:342) through the route of Ibn Wahb, who said, "Malik bin Anas informed me, saying, It reached me from Amr bin Shuayb." Zurqani, in his commentary on the Muwatta (3:96–97), quoted from Istidhkar by Ibn Abdul-Barr, "It is more likely to be Ibn Lahia." Then he [meaning Ibn Abdul-Barr] cited it through the route of Ibn Wahb, from Malik, from Abdullah bin Lahia, from Amr, with the same wording.Bayhaqi also reported it (5:343) through the route of Abu Ahmad Ibn Adi Hafiz, from the narration of Malik from the trustworthy narrator, then quoted from Ibn Adi, who said, "It is said that Malik heard this hadith from Ibn Lahia, from Amr bin Shuayb. The hadith from Ibn Lahia, from Amr bin Shuayb, is well known." Bayhaqi then quoted Ibn Adi's narration of it through the route of Qutayba bin Saeed, "Ibn Lahia narrated to us, from Amr bin Shuayb," and related it. This is a sahih, connected isnad, contrary to what Bayhaqi later claimed, that Ibn Lahia cannot be relied upon as proof, and that the original form of this hadith is Malik's mursal report.It has also come through another route. Hafiz mentioned in Lisan Mizan (6:212) that Daraqutni reported it in Gharaib Malik, through the route of Haytham bin Bayan, "Malik narrated to us, from Amr bin Harith, from Amr bin Shuayb," and so on. Daraqutni then said, "Haytham bin Bayan alone reported it from Malik, from Amr bin Harith." It has also been reported by Habib, from Malik, from Abdullah bin Amir Aslami, and it is also said, from Malik, from Ibn Lahia. In the Muwatta it appears as, from Malik, that it reached him from Amr bin Shuayb. The isnad of Haytham bin Bayan is good. Haytham was declared daif by Abu Fath Azdi, but this weakening carries no weight when he is the sole source for it. Abu Hatim said of Haytham, "Salih (sound)." And Amr bin Harith bin Yaqub Ansari, from whom Malik reported this, is a well known, trustworthy narrator.As for Habib's narration, to which Daraqutni referred, Bayhaqi reported it (5:342), saying after the Muwatta narration, "This is how Malik bin Anas reported this hadith in the Muwatta, without naming who reported it to him. Habib bin Abu Habib reported it from Malik, saying, Abdullah bin Amir Aslami narrated to me, from Amr bin Shuayb," and he related the hadith. Bayhaqi then reported it with his isnad through the route of Miqdam bin Dawud bin Talid Ruayni, "Habib bin Abu Habib narrated to us," and related it. Ibn Majah also reported it (2:10) from Fadl bin Yaqub Rakhami, "Habib bin Abu Habib Abu Muhammad, the scribe of Malik bin Anas, narrated to us, Abdullah bin Amir Aslami narrated to us, from Amr bin Shuayb," and so on.This is a very daif isnad. Habib bin Abu Habib Misri, the scribe of Malik, is extremely daif, indeed he was accused of fabrication, so he carries no weight. Moreover, there is disagreement about his report, as you can see. In Ibn Majah's version, he reported it directly from Abdullah bin Amir Aslami, while in Bayhaqi's version, he reported it from Malik, from Abdullah bin Amir. Ibn Majah's version is more reliable, indeed it is the correct one, because the one who narrated it from Habib, namely Fadl bin Yaqub Rakhami, is a trustworthy hafiz. As for Bayhaqi's version, it comes through the route of Miqdam bin Dawud Ruayni, who is daif, as is clear from his biography in Lisan Mizan (6:84–85).Majd Ibn Taymiyyah attributed the hadith in Muntaqa (2805) to Nasai as well, but I did not find it in Sunan Nasai. Perhaps it is in Sunan al-Kubra, which is why Munziri (3359) did not attribute it to him, nor did Ibn Athir in Jami Usul (324).Urban, with a damma on the ain, a sakin on the ra, a light ba, and after the alif a nun, was explained by Malik in the Muwatta right after the hadith. He said, "This, as we see it, Allah knows best, is when a man buys a slave or a maidservant, or hires an animal, and then says to the one from whom he bought or hired, I will give you a dinar, or a dirham, or more, or less, on condition that if I take the goods, or ride the animal I hired from you, then what I gave you counts toward the price of the goods or the hire of the animal, but if I forgo buying the goods or hiring the animal, then what I gave you is forfeited without anything owed in return." This is what is known among people to this day by the name urban.Ibn Athir explained it in Nihaya in a manner similar to Malik's explanation, then said, "It is said, arraba fi kadha, arraba, and arraban. It is urban, and urbun (with a damma on the ain and sakin on the ra), and urban (with a fatha on both the ain and the ra)." It is said it was named this as an irab, meaning a setting right and removal of defect, for the contract of sale, so that no one else could acquire it through purchase. See also Muarrab by Jawaliqi with our commentary (pp. 232–233), where we had inclined toward weakening this hadith, but we have here revisited that judgment and established its soundness. Praise be to Allah.This word was written in manuscript (H) as al-arabat, with a ya instead of the ba, and a ta at the end instead of the nun, which is an obvious scribal error. We have corrected it based on manuscripts (K) and (M), and on the Muwatta and other sources.