Azami 4786

Bukhari (1531) narrated it from Ali bin Muslim, who said, "Abdullah bin Numayr narrated to us, who said, Ubaydullah narrated to us, from Nafi, from Ibn Umar," in this manner.His words, "the two misrs," is the dual form of misr, and what is meant by them are Kufa and Basra, which are in Iraq.Bayhaqi said in Marifat al-Sunan wal-Athar, "It seems that Umar had not been informed of the Prophet's ﷺ designation of Zat Irq as a miqat. If the hadiths about that are sahih, then his own designation matched the Prophet's ﷺ designation."This is how Bayhaqi commented on the matter, but the established and sahih view, held by most of the companions of Shafii, is that the designation of the miqat for the people of Iraq was explicitly stated by the Prophet ﷺ himself, and this is also the view of Malik, Ahmad, Abu Hanifa, and their followers.As for the fact that Iraq had not yet been conquered, this is no argument for those who deny that the designation came from the Prophet ﷺ, because he ﷺ also designated a miqat for the people of Syria, even though Syria had not yet been conquered either.In Tamhid (15/140), "Some have said that it was Umar who designated Aqiq as the miqat for the people of Iraq, because it was conquered during his time.Others said that this is a lapse on the part of those who say this, because it was he who designated Zat Irq and Aqiq as the miqat for the people of Iraq, just as he designated Juhfa as the miqat for the people of Syria, even though Syria as a whole was, at that time, a land of disbelief just like Iraq. So he designated miqats for the people of these regions because he knew that Allah would grant his nation conquest over Syria, Iraq, and other lands, and Syria and Iraq were not conquered except during the time of Umar, without dispute.And he said, 'Iraq has withheld its dinar and its dirham,' the meaning of this hadith, according to the people of knowledge, is 'it will withhold them.'" End of quote.