Azami 11576

Ahmad (12416) and Hakim (4/417) both narrated it from the hadith of Imran, from Qatada, from Anas, as mentioned. Its isnad is hasan because of Imran, who is Ibn Dawar Qattan, for he is hasan al-hadith.Similar in meaning is what was reported from Anas bin Malik, who said, "The Messenger of Allah gave permission to a household from the Ansar to perform ruqya for poison, and he gave permission for ruqya for the evil eye and for the sore that appears on the side of the body." Anas said, "I was cauterized for pleurisy while the Messenger of Allah was still alive, and Abu Talha, Anas bin Nadr, and Zayd bin Thabit were present with me, and Abu Talha cauterized me."Abu Yaala (2819) and Bayhaqi (9/342) both narrated it through the route of Rayhan bin Saeed, who said, Abbad bin Mansur told us, from Ayub, from Abu Qilaba, from Anas bin Malik, as mentioned. Abbad bin Mansur is daif according to the majority of the scholars.Bukhari mentioned it as a suspended narration (mualaq) in the Book of Medicine (5720, 5721), saying, "Abbad bin Mansur said, from Ayub, from Abu Qilaba, from Anas bin Malik, who said, 'The Messenger of Allah gave permission to a household to perform ruqya for poison and for the ear'," without mentioning cauterization. Then he said, "Anas said, 'I was cauterized for pleurisy while the Messenger of Allah was still alive, and Abu Talha, Anas bin Nadr, and Zayd bin Thabit were present with me, and Abu Talha cauterized me.'" End of quotation.I say, Anas's statement, without mention of ruqya for poison and for the ear, is established in the Sahih as already mentioned. Al-Humah means poison, and al-udhn here refers to earache.It can be drawn from Bukhari's suspended mention of Abbad bin Mansur's statement that the illness Anas had was pleurisy, and it can also be drawn from it that ruqya is mentioned for poison and for the ear, except that Abbad bin Mansur is daif according to the majority of the scholars, as already stated.