The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, "For a man's belly to be filled with pus that eats away at him is better for him than to be filled with poetry."
حدثنا الفضل بن دكين حدثنا سفيان عن الأعمش عن ذكوان
قال رسول الله ﷺ لأن يمتلئ جوف الرجل قيحا يريه خير له من أن يمتلئ شعرا
Its isnad is sahih. Zakwan is Abu Salih Samman. Bukhari related the hadith in 10:453, and Muslim in 2:199, both from the hadith of Amash from Abu Salih, with the same wording. Its meaning has already passed in the hadith of Saad bin Abu Waqqas, numbers 1506, 1507, 1535, 1569, and in the hadith of Ibn Umar, numbers 4975, 5704.Regarding his saying "yuriyahu," Ibn Athir said, this is from al-wary, meaning disease. It is said, "wariya yariy," so he is "muwarin," when the disease strikes his innards. Azhari said, al-wary, following the pattern of al-ramy, is a disease that penetrates the innards. It is said, "a man muwarin," without a hamzah. Farra said, it is al-rada, with fatha on the ra. Thalab said, it is with sukun on the first letter when used as a verb, and with fatha it is the noun form. Jawhari said, "radiya al-qayh jawfahu, yariyhi radyan" means the pus consumed his innards.Some said its meaning is "until it strikes his lung." Others rejected this, because al-riah (lung) has a hamzah, and if you form a verb from it you say, "raahu yaruhu," so it is "maruwwin." Azhari said, its origin is from "wariya," with the hamzah dropped from it, so it is said, "wariytu al-rajul," so he is "muwarin," meaning I struck his lung. The well-known form for al-riah has the hamzah.Hafiz said in Fath al-Bari, it does not follow from its origin having a hamzah that it cannot be used in a softened, unhamzed form. And "yuriyahu" here is marfu, so it is read with sukun on the second ya.Hafiz said, Ibn Jawzi said, in the hadith of Saad as related by Muslim it occurs as "hatta yuriyahu," while in the hadith of Abu Hurairah as related by Bukhari, "hatta" is omitted. So when it is present, "yuriyahu" is read in the accusative, and when it is omitted, it is read in the nominative. He said, I have seen a group of beginners read it in the accusative while omitting "hatta," following what is familiar. This is a mistake, since there is nothing here to warrant the accusative, and he mentioned that Ibn Khashshab drew attention to this.