I came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ while he was at Mina, or perhaps at Arafat, and the people had gathered around him. The bedouins would come, and when they saw his face, they would say, "This is a blessed face."And he designated Dhat Irq as the place from which the people of Iraq enter the state of ihram.
أتيت رسول الله ﷺ وهو بمنى أو بعرفات وقد أطاف به الناس قال فتجيء الأعراب فإذا رأوا وجهه قالوا: هذا وجه مبارك. قال: ووقت ذات عرق لأهل العراق.
Abu Dawud (1742) narrated it from Abu Muamar Abdullah bin Amr bin Abu Hajjaj, from Abdul-Warith, from Utba bin Abdul-Malik Sahmi, from Zurara bin Kareem, that Harith bin Amr Sahmi told him, and he related the hadith. Daraqutni (2502) and Bayhaqi (28/5) both narrated it as well, through the hadith of Abu Muamar Abdullah bin Amr, and they related the same thing. Bayhaqi added, after the words "Zat Irq for the people of Iraq," the phrase "and for the people of the East."Bayhaqi said, "This is also the view held by Urwa bin Zubayr, as reported by Hisham bin Urwa from him, who said that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ designated Zat Irq as the miqat for the people of the East." I say, this is a good report with an incomplete chain. The hadith of Harith bin Amr is hasan because of Zurara bin Kareem bin Harith bin Amr Sahmi, of whom it is said that he had seen the Prophet. But Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Thiqat (267/4) among the trustworthy narrators of the Tabiin. As for Bayhaqi's statement in Marifa (96/7), "In its chain there is someone unknown," the correct view is that they are known. There are other hadiths on this topic mentioned by Zaylai in Nasb Raya (14/3), but they are all flawed.As for what is reported from Abdullah bin Abbas, that the Prophet ﷺ designated Aqeeq as the miqat for the people of the East, its chain of transmission is daif. Abu Dawud (1740) and Tirmidhi (832) both narrated it through the hadith of Waki, from Sufyan, from Yazid bin Abu Ziyad, from Muhammad bin Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbas, from Ibn Abbas, and he related it. Imam Ahmad (3205) also narrated it through this same route. Tirmidhi said, "Hasan."I say, it is not hasan, rather it is daif for two reasons. The first reason is that it contains Yazid bin Abu Ziyad, who is daif by consensus of the scholars. Nawawi said in Majmu (195/7), responding to Tirmidhi's grading of hasan, "He is daif by consensus of the hadith scholars." Munziri had already graded him daif before him, and Bayhaqi said in Marifa (533/3), "Yazid bin Abu Ziyad alone narrated it."The second reason is that there is a break in the chain, for Muhammad bin Ali did not hear from his grandfather Ibn Abbas, and what is correct is that he narrates from his father, from his grandfather. Ibn Qattan said in his book Bayan Wahm wa Iham, "I fear that this hadith is disconnected, for Muhammad bin Ali bin Abdullah bin Abbas is only known to narrate from his father, from his grandfather Ibn Abbas, as is found in Sahih Muslim, regarding the Prophet's ﷺ night prayer." Muslim said in his book Tamyiz, "We do not know of him having heard from his grandfather, nor that he ever met him." Neither Bukhari nor Ibn Abu Hatim mentioned that he narrates from his grandfather, and they mentioned that he narrates from his father. End of quote. See Nasb Raya (14/3).Shafii did not include this hadith in Umm, but he denied that the Prophet ﷺ designated Zat Irq as the miqat for the people of the East, and he said, "A trustworthy source informed us, from Ayub, from Ibn Sirin, that Umar bin Khattab designated Zat Irq as the miqat for the people of the East." He said, "This is reported from Umar bin Khattab with an incomplete chain. And Zat Irq is similar to Qarn in its proximity to Yalamlam. If they had entered ihram from Aqeeq, that would have been dearer to me." Umm (2/138).It appears from this statement that the designation by Umar bin Khattab did not reach him except through an incomplete chain, and so he did not adopt it, whereas had it reached him with a connected chain, he would have been the most eager of people to act upon it. And success comes from Allah.Bayhaqi said in Sughra (1497), "Between Aqeeq and Zat Irq is a short distance, and Shafii recommended entering ihram from it." Nawawi related in Majmu (197/7-198) that Shafii said in Mukhtasar and Musannaf, and the rest of the companions of the school said, that if the people of the East entered ihram from Aqeeq it would be better, and it is a valley beyond Zat Irq, toward the East. Our companions said, "The basis for this is the caution found in Aqeeq." It was said, "It also provides safety from a confusion that occurred regarding Zat Irq, because Zat Irq was a village that fell into ruin and its buildings were shifted toward Makkah, so caution requires entering ihram before its current location." They said, "It is required of whoever comes from the direction of Iraq to search carefully for the remains of the old village and to enter ihram at the point where he reaches it." Shafii said, "Among its landmarks are the old graves, so when he reaches them, he should enter ihram." The author and the companions found support for this caution we have mentioned in the earlier hadith designating Aqeeq. And Allah knows best.