Azami 3423

Ibn Abu Dunya (180) narrated it from Humayd bin Zanjawayh, who said, Abdullah bin Yusuf narrated to us, Haytham bin Humayd narrated to us, Zayd bin Waqid informed me, from Qasim, from Abu Saeed Khudri, and he mentioned it. Its chain is hasan because of Haytham bin Humayd, who is Ghassani, their freedman. Ibn Main and Abu Dawud declared him trustworthy. Hafiz Munziri mentioned it in Targhib (5160) and attributed it to Ibn Abu Dunya, saying, "Its narrators are trustworthy."On this subject there is also a report from Iyad bin Ghutayf, who said, We entered upon Abu Ubayda bin Jarra to visit him during an illness that had afflicted him, while his wife Tuhayfa was sitting at his head. We said, "How did Abu Ubayda spend the night?" She said, "By Allah, he spent it earning reward." Abu Ubayda said, "I did not spend it earning reward." He had been facing the wall, but then he turned his face toward the people and said, "Will you not ask me about what I said?" They said, "We were not impressed by what you said, so we will not ask you about it." He said, I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say, "Whoever spends surplus wealth in the way of Allah receives seven hundred times the reward. Whoever spends on himself and his family, or visits a sick person, or removes something harmful from the road, receives ten times the reward for the good deed. Fasting is a shield as long as one does not tear it. And whoever Allah afflicts with a trial in his body, it serves as an expiation for him."Imam Ahmad (1690) and Abu Yaala (878) both narrated it through the route of Wasil, the freedman of Abu Uyayna, from Bashar bin Abu Sayf Jarmi, from Walid bin Abdul-Rahman Jurashi, from Iyad bin Ghutayf, with similar wording. In Musnad Bazzar (1286), Walid bin Abdul-Rahman Jurashi has dropped out between Bashar and Iyad bin Ghutayf, and there it reads "Harith bin Ghutayf" instead. Ibn Hibban said, "Whoever says Harith bin Ghutayf has erred." Bashar bin Abu Sayf was not declared trustworthy by anyone, though Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqat (6/113) and said, "Wasil, the freedman of Abu Uyayna, and Jareer bin Hazim narrated from him." For this reason Hafiz said in Taqrib, "Acceptable," meaning where he is corroborated, otherwise his hadith is weak. He was not corroborated on this occasion. Hakim (3/265) also reported it. Nasai (2233) reported it through the route of Hammad bin Zayd, from Wasil, with part of the wording.On this subject there is also a report from Asad bin Karz, that he heard the Prophet ﷺ say, "The sick person's sins fall away from him just as leaves fall from a tree." Abdullah bin Ahmad narrated it in the additions to the Musnad (16654), and Tabarani in Kabir (1/317), both from Uqba bin Mukram Ammi, who said, Salm bin Qutayba narrated to us, from Yunus bin Abu Ishaq, from Ismail bin Awsat, from Khalid bin Abdullah, from his grandfather Asad bin Karz, and he mentioned it.There is a break in this chain, for Khalid bin Abdullah, who is Ibn Yazid bin Asad Qasri, the governor, his narration from Asad bin Karz is broken, as Hafiz said in Tajeel (44), Asad being the grandfather of his father. As for Haythami's statement in Majma (2/301), "Ahmad and Tabarani reported it in Kabir, and its chain is hasan," this contains two problems. First, attributing it to Ahmad, when in fact it is correctly among the additions of his son. Second, his statement "its chain is hasan," when in fact it is daif because of the break. Likewise Munziri's statement in Targhib (4/293), after attributing it to Abdullah bin Ahmad and Ibn Abu Dunya (209), "with a hasan chain," is not hasan.Also in the chain is Ismail bin Awsat, who is Bajali, the governor of Kufa, who was among the supporters of Hajjaj, and who was the one who handed over Saeed bin Jubayr for execution. Azdi mentioned this last point and said, "One should not narrate from him." Zakariya Saji said, "He was daif." See Tajeel (48).As for what is reported from Abu Hurairah, that the Prophet ﷺ visited a man suffering from fever and said, "Rejoice, for Allah says, 'This is My fire which I impose upon My believing servant in this world so that it may be his share of the Fire,'" it is daif. Ahmad (9676), Ibn Majah (3470), and Hakim (1/345) all reported it through the route of Abu Usama, from Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Jabir, from Ismail bin Abdullah, from Abu Salih Ashari, from Abu Hurairah, and he mentioned it. Hakim said, "Sahih chain."I say, this is what appears on the surface, but there is a hidden flaw in it. Ibn Abu Hatim mentioned in Jarh wa Tadil (5/300), in the biography of Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Tamim Sulami Dimashqi, that Abdul-Rahman said, Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal informed me in what he wrote to me, saying, I asked my father about Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Tamim, and he said, "He inverts the hadiths of Shahr bin Hawshab, making them appear as hadiths of Zuhri," and he declared him daif. Abdul-Rahman said, my father narrated to me, saying, I asked Muhammad bin Abdul-Rahman, the nephew of Husayn Jufi, about Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid, and he said, "Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Tamim and Yazid bin Yazid bin Jabir both came to Kufa, then Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Jabir came afterward, a long time later. So the one Abu Usama narrates from is not Ibn Jabir, he is Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Tamim."He then said, I asked my father about Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Tamim, and he said, "He has objectionable narrations. It is said that he is the one from whom Abu Usama and Husayn Jufi narrated, and both of them said he was Ibn Yazid bin Jabir, making an error in his lineage. Ibn Yazid bin Tamim is more correct, and he is daif in hadith." Abdul-Rahman said, I asked Abu Zura about Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Tamim, and he said, "Daif in hadith." See Jarh wa Tadil (5/300–301).Abu Dawud said, "Abandoned in hadith. Abu Usama narrated from him and erred in his name, saying Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid bin Jabir Shami. Everything that comes from Abu Usama, from Abdul-Rahman bin Yazid, is actually from Ibn Tamim." See further in his biography in Tahzib Kamal (4/488–489).As for Abu Salih Ashari, Abu Zura said of him, "His name is not known." Abu Hatim said, "There is no harm in him." Dhahabi declared him trustworthy in Mizan. A group has narrated from him.It has also been reported from Abu Umama, as a marfu narration, "Fever is a furnace from Hell. Whatever a believer suffers from it becomes his share of the Fire, sparing him from it." Imam Ahmad (22274) and Tabarani in Kabir (8/110) both reported it through the route of Muhammad bin Mutarrif (who is Abu Ghassan), from Abu Husayn, from Abu Salih Ashari, from Abu Umama, and he mentioned similar wording. Tahawi also reported it by this same route in his Mushkil (2216).Abu Husayn, who is Filastini, Haythami said of him in Majma (2/305), "Ahmad and Tabarani reported it in Kabir, and in it is Abu Husayn Filastini, and I have not seen anyone narrate from him other than Muhammad bin Mutarrif," meaning that he is unknown. Hafiz followed him, saying in Taqrib, "Unknown," and said, "It is said that he is Marwan bin Ruba Taghlibi," who is "acceptable."I say, even so, Abu Husayn contradicts Ismail bin Ubaydullah, who is Ibn Abu Muhajir, from Abu Salih, from Abu Hurairah, as mentioned earlier.It has also been reported from Abu Rayhana, as a marfu narration, with the wording, "Fever is a furnace from the heat of Hell, and it is the believer's portion of the Fire." Ibn Abu Dunya reported it in Marad wal-Kaffarat (21), and Tahawi in his Mushkil (2217), both through the route of Muslim bin Ibrahim, who said, Isma bin Salim Hinai narrated to us, Ashath bin Jabir informed us, from Shahr bin Hawshab, from Abu Rayhana, and he mentioned it.Isma bin Salim Hinai is "unknown," because no one narrated from him except Muslim bin Ibrahim, and no one declared him trustworthy, Ibn Hibban merely mentioned him in Thiqat (8/519). Shahr bin Hawshab is subject to well-known discussion, and his hadith is only graded hasan when used as a corroborating narration, and where he is not contradicted. Munziri faulted this narration on account of him, in Targhib (5175), saying, "Ibn Abu Dunya and Tabarani both reported it through the narration of Shahr bin Hawshab." Haythami said in Majma (2/306), "Tabarani reported it in Kabir, and in it is Shahr bin Hawshab, concerning whom there is discussion, though a group have declared him trustworthy."Faulting this narration because of Isma bin Salim is more appropriate than faulting it because of Shahr bin Hawshab.It has also been reported from Ayesha, as a marfu narration, "Fever is every believer's portion of the Fire." Bazzar (765, Kashf Astar) reported it from Muhammad bin Musa Wasiti, who said, Uthman bin Makhlad narrated to us, Hushaym narrated to us, from Mughira, from Ibrahim, from Aswad, from Ayesha, and she mentioned it. Bazzar said, "We do not know of anyone who narrated it from Hushaym with a full chain except Uthman."Munziri mentioned it in Targhib (5177) and said, "Bazzar reported it with a hasan chain." Haythami said likewise in Majma (2/306).I say, Uthman bin Makhlad is Tammar Wasiti. Ibn Abu Hatim mentioned him in Jarh wa Tadil (6/170) without saying anything about him, contenting himself with saying, "He narrated from Hushaym, and Muhammad bin Abdul-Malik Daqiqi Wasiti narrated from him." Ibn Hibban likewise mentioned him in Thiqat (8/453), mentioning the same thing Ibn Abu Hatim mentioned. So he remains among the unknown narrators.It has also been reported from Uthman, as a marfu narration, with the wording, "Fever is the believer's portion of the Fire on the Day of Judgment." Ibn Abu Dunya reported it in Marad wal-Kaffarat (157), and Aqeeli in Duafa (3/448), both through the route of Ali bin Bahr bin Barri Qattan, who said, Fadl bin Hammad Azdi narrated to us, from Abdullah bin Imran, from Malik bin Dinar, from Mabad Juhani, from Uthman bin Affan, and he mentioned it. Aqeeli said, in the biography of Fadl bin Hammad Azdi, "There is a problem in its chain." Dhahabi said, "There is unknownness in him."As for what is reported from Ibn Abbas, from the Prophet ﷺ, who said, "The martyr will be brought on the Day of Judgment and set up for reckoning. Then the one who gave charity will be brought and set up for reckoning. Then the people afflicted with trials will be brought, and no scale will be set up for them, nor will any record be spread out for them. Rather, the reward will be poured upon them all at once, until the people of well-being wish that their bodies had been cut apart with scissors, on account of the excellence of Allah's reward for them," this is daif. Tabarani reported it in Kabir (12/182) from Sari bin Sahl Jundisaburi, who said, Abdullah bin Rashid narrated to us, Majaa bin Zubayr narrated to us, from Qatada, from Jabir bin Zayd, from Ibn Abbas, who said, and he mentioned it.Bayhaqi said in Kubra (6/108), regarding Sari bin Sahl and his shaykh, "Neither of them can be relied upon." I say, "Sari bin Sahl" is perhaps "Sari bin Asim," as Ibn Turkmani understood it, and he quoted from Ibn Adi that he said, "He used to steal hadiths." Kamil (3/1298). Ibn Hajar understood it the same way as well.Likewise, what is reported from Jabir as a marfu narration is not sahih, "The people of well-being will wish, on the Day of Judgment, when the people of trials are given their reward, that their skins had been cut apart with scissors in this world." It is daif. Tirmidhi (2402) reported it from Muhammad bin Humayd Razi and Yusuf bin Musa Qattan Baghdadi, who both said, Abdul-Rahman bin Mughra Abu Zuhayr narrated to us, from Amash, from Abu Zubayr, from Jabir, and he mentioned similar wording.Tirmidhi said, "This is a gharib hadith, we do not know it with this chain except through this route. Some have narrated this hadith from Amash, from Talha bin Musarrif, from Masruq, as his own statement, in similar form."I say, Abdul-Rahman bin Mughra, Abu Zuhayr Kufi, Ali bin Madini said of him, "He is nothing, he used to narrate six hundred hadiths from Amash, we abandoned him, he was not reliable." Ibn Adi said, "He is as Ali described. What I objected to in Abu Zuhayr are hadiths he narrates from Amash which the trustworthy narrators do not corroborate him on, while he has other narrations apart from Amash, and he is among the ranks of the weak narrators whose hadith is nevertheless written down." Saji said, "Among the people of truthfulness, though there is weakness in him." Khalili declared him trustworthy, and Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqat.The conclusion is that he is daif in his narrations from Amash, and his narration here is from Amash. For this reason Ibn Jawzi included it in Mawduat.As for what is reported from Abdullah bin Amr, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, "Whoever has his head split open in the way of Allah and seeks reward for it, his previous sins will be forgiven him," this is daif. Bazzar (767, Kashf) reported it through the route of Abdul-Rahman bin Ziyad Afriqi, from Abdullah bin Yazid, from Abdullah bin Amr, and he mentioned similar wording.Haythami said in Majma (2/303), "Its chain is hasan." I say, it is not hasan, rather it is daif, because it revolves around Abdul-Rahman bin Ziyad Afriqi, who is daif in his memory according to the majority of scholars.Haythami also mentioned it in Majma (2/302) from Abdullah bin Umar, attributing it to Tabarani in Kabir, and said, "Its chain is hasan." I say, this is perhaps an error on Haythami's part, for most of those who reported this hadith made it part of the musnad of Abdullah bin Amr, through the route I have mentioned. Allah knows best.