Ahmad 7335

Its chain is sahih, indeed it has two chains. Sufyan bin Uyayna narrated it by two chains. He narrated it from Abu Zinad from Araj from Abu Hurairah. And he narrated it from Ibn Jurayj from Hasan bin Muslim from Tawus from Abu Hurairah. Both chains are sahih.Hasan bin Muslim bin Yanaq (with a fatha on the letter ya and a shadda on the nun), the Makki, his reliability was established earlier at 897, and we add here that Bukhari mentioned him in al-Kabir 2/1:304, Ibn Saad 5:352-353, and Ibn Abu Hatim 2/1:36.Qadi Iyad made an error in al-Mashariq, following others, regarding the two chains of this hadith in Muslim, which is similar to the two chains of Ahmad here. He said, "There is another error in its chain. Udhri said Amr narrated it from Sufyan and Ibn Jurayj here, and this is a mixing up of vision and an error on the part of both of them." But the chain in Sahih Muslim 1:279-280 is as follows, "Amr Naqid narrated to us, Sufyan bin Uyayna narrated to us, from Abu Zinad, from Araj, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet, he said." Amr said, "And Sufyan bin Uyayna narrated to us, he said, and Ibn Jurayj said, from Hasan bin Muslim, from Tawus, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet ﷺ, he said," then he related the hadith, as will come. So Amr Naqid did not narrate it from Sufyan and Ibn Jurayj together, as Udhri and Iyad supposed. Rather, he narrated it, as Ahmad and others did, from Sufyan bin Uyayna, and Sufyan narrated it from Abu Zinad by one chain and from Ibn Jurayj by another chain.As for the text mentioned here in the Musnad, it is not the wording of the hadith itself. Rather, it consists of remarks by Imam Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, pointing to the difference between the wording of Abu Zinad and the wording of Ibn Jurayj, in what Sufyan narrated from each of them, regarding one of the expressions of the hadith. I have not found its full wording in the Musnad from Sufyan's narration by either of the two routes, nor by one of them alone, even though the Hafiz indicated in al-Fath 3:241, in a way that suggests Ahmad narrated it in full from Ibn Uyayna, so perhaps it exists in the Musnad in a place I have not identified. However, it will come by both routes with other chains. Ahmad narrated it at 7477 through the route of Ibn Ishaq from Abu Zinad. He narrated it at 9045 through the route of Wahib from Abdullah bin Tawus from his father. He narrated it at 10780 through the route of Ibrahim bin Nafi from Hasan bin Muslim from Tawus.It appears to me that Imam Ahmad related this difference in the wording of the hadith between the narrations of Abu Zinad and Ibn Jurayj on some occasion, and his son Abdullah recorded it as he heard it. Perhaps he did not hear from his father his full narration from Sufyan, or he heard it and forgot to record it in this place.Many errors occurred in the wording mentioned here of this hadith in the printed edition (h), to the point of making it incomprehensible, and some errors also occurred in manuscript (m). The most correct is what we have established from manuscript (k), as we will explain in detail, Allah willing.As for his saying "law umirat" (if it were commanded), in a copy in the margin of (m) it reads "aw umirat," and both are errors, the correct reading being "aw marrat" (or it stretched).As for his saying "tujinn banaanahu," in (k) it reads "tajurr banaatahu" (it drags its daughters), which is meaningless nonsense. The same appears in (m), but without even the dot for the letter jim! Similar to this error is what Qadi Iyad related in al-Mashariq 2:324, that in this passage, in the book of Qadi Abu Ali (meaning in his copy of Sahih Muslim), it appears as "hatta najr" with the plain ha and ra, instead of "tajinn," and this is a mistake. Some narrated it as "al-baanahu," which is also an error. The correct reading is "banaanahu" (its fingertips), and this is supported by the wording in the other hadith, "his fingertips" (anaamilahu). The Qadi means by "the other hadith" the narration that follows this one in Sahih Muslim, which is the narration of Ibrahim bin Nafi from Hasan bin Muslim.As for his saying "fa-yuwassiuha" (so it widens it), in (h) it reads "fa-yusimuha," which is an error. As for his saying at the end of the hadith "wa la tatawassa" (and it does not expand), in (q) it reads "wa la tatasa," which is also an error.I have searched diligently for this hadith from the narration of Sufyan bin Uyayna, meaning from the route through which Ahmad narrated it, and I found only two narrations, one in Muslim and one in Nasai. Remarkably, an error occurred in some of its wording even in Muslim's narration, as we will explain, and Nasai's narration is the better of the two.Muslim narrated it at 1:279-280 from Amr Naqid from Sufyan, and we have already mentioned its chain. Nasai narrated it at 1:353-354 from Muhammad bin Mansur Tusi from Sufyan.We will establish here Nasai's narration with its chain, then point to the explanation of the hadith and to the errors that occurred with some of its narrators, then mention its sourcing from other routes, as much as we are able, Allah willing.Nasai said, "Muhammad bin Mansur informed us, he said, Sufyan narrated to us, from Ibn Jurayj, from Hasan bin Muslim, from Tawus, who said, 'I heard Abu Hurairah,'" then he said, meaning Sufyan bin Uyayna, "Abu Zinad narrated to us, from Araj, from Abu Hurairah, who said, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, 'The example of the one who gives charity habitually, the one who gives charity, and the miser is like two men wearing two iron cloaks, or two coats, extending from their chests to their collarbones. When the giver of charity wants to give, the armor widens on him, or stretches, until it covers his fingertips and erases his footprints. And when the miser wants to give, it contracts, and every ring stays in its place, until it takes hold of him at his collarbone, or at his neck.'" Abu Hurairah says, "I bear witness that I saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ widening it but it would not widen." Tawus said, "I heard Abu Hurairah gesturing with his hand as he said, 'He widens it but it does not widen.'"This is Nasai's narration, and it is complete and clear. As for Muslim's narration, it contains an evident abridgment and confusion in the ordering of clauses. Its wording is, "Amr Naqid narrated to us, Sufyan bin Uyayna narrated to us, from Abu Zinad, from Araj, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet ﷺ," he said, "and Ibn Jurayj said, from Hasan bin Muslim, from Tawus, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet ﷺ," he said, "The example of the giver of charity habitually and the giver of charity is like a man wearing two cloaks, or two coats, extending from their chests to their collarbones. When the giver of charity wants to..." and he said the other, meaning by this one of the two teachers from whom Sufyan narrated, either Abu Zinad or Ibn Jurayj, distinguishing the narration of one from the other, "when he wants to give charity, wants to give charity, it becomes complete upon him, or it stretched, and when the miser wants to give, it contracts upon him, and every ring takes its place, until it covers his fingertips and erases his footprints." He said, "Abu Hurairah said, 'He widens it but it does not widen.'"Qadi Iyad explained in al-Mashariq 2:322 the errors that occurred in this narration in Sahih Muslim. He said, "In the hadith of Amr Naqid there is much confusion, inversion, and alteration. Among them is his saying 'the example of the giver of charity habitually and the giver of charity,' which is an error, and the correct reading is 'the example of the miser and the giver of charity,' as it comes in the hadiths and as Bukhari mentioned it." I say, it appears that the Qadi did not have Nasai's narration in mind when he wrote this, and it would have been more fitting for him to refer to it, because it comes from the same route through which Amr Naqid narrated it, from Sufyan's narration. As for Bukhari, he did not narrate it through Sufyan's route, but through other routes.And in it, "like a man wearing two cloaks" in the singular, which is an error, and the correct reading is "like two men wearing two cloaks," as it comes in the other narrations.As for his saying "the two jubbatan (cloaks) or two jubbatan," the correct reading is with the nun (jannatan, coats), as he explained in the other hadith by his saying "of iron," and by his saying here "and every ring took its place." Bukhari mentioned the difference regarding this from Tawus and others, some narrating it with the nun and some with the ba.And in it, "sabaghat alayhi aw marrat" (it became complete upon him or stretched) with the ra, and it is also narrated "maddat aw marrat." The narration differs regarding this in Bukhari, being narrated as "maadat" with the dal, and narrated as "maarat" with the ra, and perhaps this is the most appropriate of the narrations, meaning "it became complete." Thus Azhari narrated it, and he explained it as "it went back and forth, coming and going." The other narrations have a clear sense too, "maddat" and "marrat," with the dal and the ra, having a similar meaning.And in it, "the miser, and every ring took its place, until it covers his fingertips and erases his footprints," which is an error, an omission from the hadith, an inversion, and a placing of the wording in the wrong place. The explanation is that the speech about the description of the miser ends at his saying "its place." As for his saying "until it covers his fingertips and erases his footprints," this actually comes earlier, in the description of the giver of charity, after his saying "it became complete upon him and stretched," and thus it comes in the other hadiths in the Sahihayn. It is the opposite of and contradicts his saying "every ring took its place," so some of the transmitters placed it in the wrong location.See Nawawi's commentary on Muslim, 7:107-109, where he quoted much of Qadi Iyad's words from al-Mashariq and from his commentary on Muslim.This hadith was also narrated by Bukhari 3:241-243 and 6:73, Muslim 1:280, and Nasai 1:354, all three through the route of Wahib, from Abdullah bin Tawus, from his father, from Abu Hurairah, similar to the Musnad's narration at 9045.It was also narrated by Bukhari 10:227-228 and Muslim 1:280, both through the route of Ibrahim bin Nafi, from Hasan bin Muslim, from Tawus, similar to the Musnad's narration at 10780.It was also narrated, as we said before, at 7477, through the route of Ibn Ishaq, from Abu Zinad. Bukhari narrated it at 3:241-243 through the route of Shuayb from Abu Zinad, placing it alongside Wahib's chain from Ibn Tawus.Bukhari also narrated it at 9:386, in suspended form, "Layth said," meaning Ibn Saad, "Jafar bin Rabia narrated to me, from Abdul-Rahman bin Hurmuz," that is, Araj, "I heard Abu Hurairah..." The Hafiz said, "The note regarding its chain was given earlier at the beginning of the Book of Zakat," pointing to what came earlier in al-Fath 3:242, where Bukhari referred to Layth's narration, also in suspended form. The Hafiz said there, "Layth's narration has not reached me connected up to now." And I have seen it from him with another chain, extracted by Ibn Hibban, through the route of Isa bin Hammad, from Layth, from Ibn Ajlan, from Abu Zinad, with his chain. So Layth's narration from Jafar bin Rabia did not reach him connected. That is why he said in the introduction to al-Fath, page 32, "As for Layth's narration from Jafar bin Rabia, I have not found it."Munziri mentioned it in al-Targhib wal-Tarhib 2:29, and attributed it to Bukhari and Muslim only. Suyuti mentioned it in al-Jami al-Saghir at 8128, and marked it with the symbols for Ahmad, the two Shaykhs, and Nasai, except that a printing error occurred in it, he wrote "t," the symbol for Tirmidhi, instead of "n," the symbol for Nasai. It is established correctly in Munawi's commentary, in the commentary alone, while the error occurs in the printed text set alongside it at the top of the page. It is also established correctly in a manuscript of al-Jami al-Saghir that I have. Tirmidhi certainly did not narrate it, rather it was Nasai who narrated it, as we have mentioned.As for his saying in the hadith "min ludun thadyayhima" (from their chests), it is with a damma on the tha, a kasra on the dal, and a shadda on the ya, the plural of thady (chest). "Ila taraaqihima" (to their collarbones), taraaqi is the plural of tarquwa, with a fatha on the ta, a sakin on the ra, a damma on the qaf, and a fatha on the waw, which is the bone between the hollow of the throat and the shoulder."It widened the armor upon him, or stretched." Sindi said in his commentary on Nasai, "That is, it exceeded that location, and this is a doubt on the part of the narrator." We have already mentioned Qadi Iyad's remarks about the difference in the narrations regarding this word, between "marrat" and "maddat," and so on, and his reference to discussing it under the letter mim. He said there, 1:275, "Marrat is also correct, and maadat with the dal is close to this. Maadat may have a shadda on the dal, from imtidad (extension), and 'faala' can come with the meaning of 'faala' from a single form. Most of them vocalized it with the shadda. It is also narrated as maddat, with the same meaning.""Fa-tujinnahu" with a damma on the ta, a kasra on the jim, and a shadda on the nun, meaning it covers him and conceals him. "And erases his footprints," with a fatha on the ta of "taafu," from the triliteral verb, with a fatha on athar (footprint). The Hafiz said, "That is, it conceals his footprint. It is said 'afaa al-shay' and 'afawtuhu ana,' being both intransitive and transitive. It is said 'afat al-daar,' when the dust covers it." The meaning is that charity conceals his sins, just as a garment that is dragged on the ground conceals the wearer's footprint as he walks, by the passing of its hem over it.Qadi Iyad said, 2:98, "From this comes the expression 'afaa Allahu anka,' meaning He erased your sin, and 'afat al-riyah al-athar' (the winds erased the traces)." In al-Lisan, Ibn Anbari said, regarding Allah's saying, "Allah has forgiven you, why did you grant them permission" [Tawbah 9:43], "'Afaa Allahu anka' is taken from their saying 'afat al-riyah al-athaar' when it obliterates and erases them. 'Afat al-athaar, taafu afwan,' the wording being the same whether intransitive or transitive.""Falaqashat," with a fatha on the qaf, the lam, and the sad, meaning it contracted and rose up.The Hafiz said in al-Fath, "Khattabi and others said, this is a parable the Prophet ﷺ set forth for the miser and the giver of charity. He likened them to two men, each of whom wanted to wear a coat of armor to protect himself from his enemy's weapon, so he poured it over his head to put it on, and the armor first falls upon the chest and the arms, until the person puts his arms into its sleeves. He made the giver of charity like one who wears a complete, flowing coat of armor, which spreads over him until it covers his entire body. This is the meaning of his saying 'until it erases his footprint,' meaning it covers his entire body. And he made the miser like a man whose hands become bound to his neck, whenever he wants to wear it, it gathers at his neck and clings to his collarbone. This is the meaning of his saying 'it contracted,' meaning it became tight and gathered."The intended meaning is that the generous person, when he resolves to give charity, his chest opens up for it, his soul becomes content, and so he expands in giving. The miser, when he considers giving charity within himself, his soul becomes stingy, so his chest becomes constricted and his hands contract."And whoever is protected from the stinginess of his own soul, it is those who are the successful" [Hashr 59:9].