Azami 5034

It has several routes, including what Imam Ahmad narrated (27367) - and this is his wording - along with Tabarani 24/(227), Daraqutni (2584), Hakim (4/70), and Bayhaqi (5/98), all of them through the route of Abdullah bin Muammal, from Umar bin Abdul-Rahman, who said, Ataa narrated to us, from Safiya bint Shayba, from Habiba bint Abu Tajra, and she related it.Hakim remained silent on it, and Dhahabi said, "It is not sound." I say, Abdullah bin Muammal is Ibn Hibah Makhzumi, who is daif, and Ibn Adi faulted the hadith because of him in Al-Kamil (4/1456), and he traced its weakening back to Ahmad, Nasai, and Ibn Main. Haythami said in Al-Majmu (3/247), "It contains Abdullah bin Muammal, whom Ibn Hibban considered trustworthy while saying, 'He makes mistakes,' and others declared him daif."Among them also is what Daraqutni (2582) and Bayhaqi (5/97) narrated, both from the hadith of Ibn Mubarak, who said, Maruf bin Mishkan informed me, Mansur bin Abdul-Rahman informed me, from his mother Safiya, who said, women from Banu Abdul-Dar who had witnessed the Messenger of Allah ﷺ informed me. They said, "We entered the house of Ibn Abu Husayn, and we looked out from a door with a clear view, and we saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ hurrying in the sa'i, until when he reached Banu so-and-so, a spot she named along the sa'i route, he turned to face the people and said, 'O people, do the sa'i, for the sa'i has been prescribed for you.'"This chain is hasan, and Maruf bin Mishkan, with the first letter given a dammah and the following letter, the sin, given a sukun, the Makkan, has hasan hadith. Hafiz Ibn Abdul-Hadi said in Al-Tanqih (3/513), "The chain of this hadith is sahih, even though it is not brought out in the Sunan works. Maruf bin Mishkan is truthful, and we do not know of anyone who criticized him. This Mansur bin Abdul-Rahman is trustworthy, brought out for him in the Sahihayn, and Abu Hatim did not criticize him, rather he said of him, his hadith is sound." End of quote.Among them also is what Imam Ahmad narrated (27463), and Ibn Khuzayma graded it sahih (2765), both from the hadith of Abdul-Razzaq, who said, Mamar informed us, from Wasil the freed slave of Abu Uyayna, from Musa bin Ubayd, from Safiya bint Shayba, that a woman informed her that she heard the Prophet ﷺ between Safa and Marwa saying, "The sa'i has been prescribed for you, so perform the sa'i."Its chain is not problematic, for two people narrated from Musa bin Ubayd, and Ibn Hibban considered him trustworthy, and he is among the men of Al-Tajil, except that in it he is given as Musa bin Ubayda, with an added ha, as found in some copies of the Musnad, and in Daraqutni (587). Hafiz noted in Al-Tajil that it is "Ubayd" without the ha. Haythami did not notice this in Al-Majmu (3/247), so he thought it was Rabadhi and declared it daif because of that.Ibn Khuzayma said, "This woman who is not named in this account is Habiba bint Abu Tajra."Among them also is what Ibn Khuzayma narrated (2764), from Muhammad bin Umar bin Ali bin Ataa bin Muqaddam Muqaddami, who said, Khalil bin Uthman narrated to us, who said, I heard Abdullah bin Bunayh, from his grandmother Safiya bint Shayba, from her grandmother, the daughter of Abu Tajra, who said, "We had a menstrual cycle during the pre-Islamic era." She said, "I looked out from an opening between Safa and Marwa, and I looked down upon the Prophet ﷺ, and there he was doing the sa'i, and there he was saying to his companions, 'Do the sa'i, for Allah has prescribed the sa'i for you.' I indeed saw him, from the intensity of the sa'i, the waist-wrap turning around his stomach, until I saw the whiteness of his stomach and thighs."In the chain there is someone for whom no biography could be found. By the combination of these routes, the hadith becomes hasan, Allah willing.As for Hafiz's statement in Fath al-Bari (3/498), "It has another route in Sahih Ibn Khuzayma in abbreviated form, and with Tabarani from Ibn Abbas similar to the first, and when joined to the first it is strengthened," there is something to question in this, for the hadith through its many routes, some strengthen others, while the hadith of Ibn Abbas does not add anything, since in its chain is Mufaddal bin Sadaqa, who is discarded, as Haythami said (3/148), and it cannot serve as a corroborating witness, and for that reason I did not bring it out. For more, see Minna Kubra (4/196-197).In these hadiths there is clear evidence that the sa'i is obligatory, which is the view of the majority, and that one does not exit the ritual state until one has performed it.From Amr bin Dinar, who said, we asked Ibn Umar about a man who circled the House seven times in an umrah but did not walk between Safa and Marwa, could he approach his wife? He said, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ arrived, circled the House seven times, prayed two units behind the Station, and walked between Safa and Marwa seven times, "Indeed in the Messenger of Allah you have a good example". We also asked Jabir bin Abdullah, and he said, he may not approach her until he has walked between Safa and Marwa. Bukhari brought out both of these (1793, 1794).This is the view of the majority of the people of knowledge, among the earlier and later generations, in the soundest of their positions, that the sa'i between Safa and Marwa in Hajj and Umrah is obligatory and is among the pillars, and it cannot be compensated for with a blood sacrifice. Whoever omits it must return to it as long as he has not had relations with women, but if he does have relations, he must repeat it the following year as a Hajj or Umrah. They said that Allah made it among the rites, and the Prophet ﷺ performed it and said, "Take your rites of pilgrimage from me," and it comes in the hadith of Habiba bint Tajra, "Do the sa'i, for Allah has prescribed the sa'i for you," and this is a hasan hadith through several routes as has preceded. Sufyan Thawri, Abu Hanifa, and Ahmad, in one report, held that it can be compensated for with a blood sacrifice.