Azami 5887

Bukhari related it in the Book of Sales (2149) from Musaddad, who said, Mutamir bin Sulayman Taymi told us, I heard my father, Abu Uthman Nahdi told us, from Abdullah bin Masud, and he narrated it. Thus the first part is mawquf, and the second part is marfu. Muslim related it in the Book of Sales (1518) through another route from Abdullah bin Mubarak, from Taymi (meaning Sulayman), from Abu Uthman, from Abdullah bin Masud, from the Prophet ﷺ, that he forbade intercepting goods before they reach the market, and he mentioned only the marfu part. This is how most narrators from Mutamir bin Sulayman related the first part, as mawquf attributed to Ibn Masud, just as Musaddad related it, and whoever related it as marfu made a mistake in it, as the Hafiz said in Fath al-Bari (4/368). As for the second part, there is no disagreement about its being marfu.Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, mentioned Ibn Masud's statement about a musarrah ewe right after the hadith of Abu Hurairah, because the people of Kufa rejected the hadith of Abu Hurairah on the grounds that he was not a jurist, and that his hadith contradicts clear analogy. This shows Bukhari's jurisprudential insight, for he was truly both a scholar of hadith and a jurist. See the details of this in my book "Abu Hurairah in the Light of His Narrations."Similar in meaning is what was narrated from Ibn Umar, who said, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, "O people, whoever sells a musarrah animal has the option for three days, and if he returns it, he must return with it the equivalent of its milk, or he said, the equivalent of its milk in wheat." Abu Dawud (3446), Ibn Majah (2240), and Bayhaqi (5/319) all related this from the hadith of Abdul-Wahid bin Ziyad, who said, Sadaqa bin Saeed Hanafi told us, who said, Jamee bin Umayr Taymi told us, who said, Abdullah bin Umar told us, and he narrated it. Its chain is daif because of Jamee bin Umayr Taymi. Bukhari said of him, "There is something questionable about him." Ibn Hibban said, "A Rafidi who fabricates hadith." However, Ajli said, "A trustworthy successor." This reflects his leniency, and Tirmidhi graded some of his hadith as hasan. Also in the chain is Sadaqa bin Saeed Hanafi, whom Saji and Ibn Wadhah declared daif.Also on this subject is what was narrated from Ibn Abbas, that the Prophet ﷺ said, "Do not go out to meet goods before they reach the market, do not withhold milk from animals before selling them, and none of you should undercut another's sale." Tirmidhi (1268), Ahmad and his son Abdullah (2313), Abu Yaala (2345), and Bayhaqi (5/317) all related this through the route of Abu Ahwas, from Simak, from Ikrima, from Ibn Abbas, who narrated it. Simak is Ibn Harb Kufi, trustworthy, whom Ibn Main and others declared trustworthy, but the majority of the scholars declared his narration from Ikrima daif, for it is confused, as Ahmad, Ibn Madini, Ajli, Ibn Mubarak, and others said. As for Tirmidhi, he said, "Hasan sahih," as though he did not take this defect into account. He said, "The practice among the people of knowledge is based on this, they disliked the sale of a musarrah animal, which is one whose owner does not milk it for several days so that milk accumulates in its udder, so that the buyer is deceived by it. This is a form of deception and gharar."His saying, "Do not tasurru," with damma on the taa and fatha on the sad, its lexical meaning will follow. In it is evidence for the prohibition of tasriyah, whether the intention behind it is a sale or not, because of the harm it causes the animal, which is forbidden. So if one sells while also practicing tasriyah, he has committed both forbidden acts, harming the animal and deceiving the buyer. As for the wording, "Do not practice tasriyah on camels and sheep for sale," this refers to the most common case. It has also been said that the prohibition is specific to selling, and that it is permissible to practice tasriyah on an animal for purposes other than selling.His saying, "If he is satisfied with it, he may keep it," is evidence for the validity of the sale despite the tasriyah, if the buyer is satisfied with it. His saying, "and a saa of dates," means, and he must return a saa of dates.The disagreement among scholars of knowledge and language regarding the derivation of musarrah, Shafii said, tasriyah means tying the teats of a she-camel or ewe and leaving it unmilked for two or three days, until milk accumulates in it, so the buyer sees it as abundant and raises the price because of what he sees of its abundant milk. Then when he milks it once or twice after that milking, he realizes that this is not its usual milk, and this is deception of the buyer.Abu Ubayd said, his saying, "musarrah," means a she-camel, cow, or ewe whose milk has been suriya in its udder, meaning confined within it, and gathered for days, so it was not milked for days. The origin of tasriyah is the confining and gathering of water, from which one says, "sarraytu al-maa" and "sarrawtuhu." Aghlab said, "I saw a young man who had confined in his back the water of youth at the peak of his vigor." It is also said, "hadha maun sara," in the contracted form. Ubayd bin Abras said, "O Lord, water that was confined, its path returned to it, fearful, drought-stricken." From this it is said the musarrah was so named as though its waters had gathered. Some people interpret musarrah as though it were from sirar of camels, but this has nothing to do with that at all, for if it were from that it would be said "musrurah," and it could not be said of cows and sheep, since sirar applies only to camels. End of quote. Ghareeb Hadith (2/241-242).Khattabi said, Abu Ubayd's statement is good, and Shafii's statement is sahih.Tasriyah is forbidden, for in it is deception and fraud, based on his saying, "Do not practice tasriyah on camels and sheep." The hadith of Abu Hurairah is sahih according to the scholars of hadith, related from him by a group including Musa bin Yasar, Abu Salih, Hammam bin Munabbih, Muhammad bin Sirin, and Muhammad bin Ziyad with sahih chains, as Ibn Abdul-Barr said in Tamhid (18/203). Ibn Masud gave a legal ruling in accordance with it, as Bukhari mentioned after the hadith of Abu Hurairah. The majority of scholars held this view, Malik, Shafii, Ahmad, and others, that one saa of dates must be returned whether the milk was little or much. The people of Iraq disagreed with them, saying that this contradicts clear analogy, and they said, if there is an equivalent, an equivalent must be returned, and if there is no equivalent, its value must be returned, and returning it in a different kind altogether is contrary to the principles. The majority responded that this settles disputes and quarrels. I have detailed the discussion of this in Minna Kubra (5/125).Bukhari's mention of Ibn Masud's statement, who was the jurist of the people of Kufa, is a rebuttal against the people of Iraq's claim that its narrator was not a jurist. Sheikh Islam bin Taymiya answered this, and this is his text.First, Umar bin Khattab appointed Abu Hurairah governor over Bahrain, and its people were among the best of Muslims, and Abu Hurairah, as their governor, was the one who gave them rulings on intricate matters of jurisprudence, such as the issue of a woman divorced less than three times, if she marries another husband who consummates the marriage with her, does she return to the first husband entitled to the full three divorces, as is the view of Abu Hanifa, or does she return with what remains of the count, which is the view of Malik and Shafii, and of Ahmad according to the well known report from him. Abu Hurairah gave rulings according to this latter view, which is also the view of Umar and the senior companions. Likewise, Abu Hurairah gave rulings on intricate matters of jurisprudence alongside the jurist companions, such as Ibn Abbas and others.Second, the companions varied in their level of jurisprudence, for Umar and Ali were more learned in jurisprudence than Imran bin Husayn and Abu Musa Ashari, yet this did not exclude the latter two from being jurists. Likewise, if Muaz and Ibn Masud and those like them were more learned in jurisprudence than Abu Hurairah and Abdullah bin Umar and those like them, this does not exclude the latter two from being jurists.Third, all the scholars of the nation acted upon the hadith of Abu Hurairah in matters that contradict apparent analogy, just as they all acted upon his hadith from the Prophet ﷺ that he said, "A woman shall not be married along with her paternal aunt, nor along with her maternal aunt." Abu Hanifa, along with Shafii and Ahmad and others, acted upon his hadith from the Prophet ﷺ, "Whoever eats or drinks forgetfully should complete his fast, for Allah has fed him and given him drink," even though analogy according to Abu Hanifa would require that his fast be broken, so he set aside analogy for the hadith of Abu Hurairah, and similar examples are numerous.Fourth, it may be said, a transmitter of hadith who has memorized the wording he heard is not harmed by not being a jurist, just as those who are taught the letters of the Quran, the wordings of the tashahhud, the adhan, and the like, are not harmed by it. Abu Hurairah was among the most retentive in memory of the nation, and the Prophet ﷺ prayed for him to have retentive memory. He said, "I never forgot anything I heard after that." This is why he related the hadith of the musarrah and others in the exact wording of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.Fifth, none of the companions ever cast doubt on anything Abu Hurairah narrated, in the sense of saying he erred in this hadith, neither Umar nor anyone else. Rather, Abu Hurairah used to hold sessions near Ayesha's chamber, and he would narrate hadith and say, "O mistress of the chamber, do you deny anything I am saying?" When Ayesha finished her prayer, she did not deny what he had narrated, but she said, "The Messenger of Allah ﷺ did not narrate hadith in rapid succession the way you do, but he would speak in a measured way such that anyone counting could memorize it." So she objected to the manner of delivery, not to what he delivered.Sixth, the companions used to defer on matters of jurisprudence to those less learned in jurisprudence than Abu Hurairah, just as Umar bin Khattab deferred to Hamal bin Malik and others regarding the blood money for a miscarried fetus, and just as Zayd bin Thabit and others deferred to a woman from the Ansar regarding the waiving of the farewell tawaf for a menstruating woman. End of his words. Majmu Fatawa (4/532).Sheikh Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri said, this hadith is raised against us, and some of the Hanafis answered it by saying that when a hadith is related by a narrator who is not a jurist, and analogy contradicts it, then acting upon it is abandoned and analogy is acted upon instead. Since the hadith of Abu Hurairah contradicts analogy, and was related by one who was not a jurist, we turned to analogy and acted upon it.Then he said, this answer is invalid and should not be heeded, and it has long been a point of criticism raised by opponents. Because of the like of this, it became well known that the Hanafis give preference to opinion over hadith, but far be it from them to say such a thing, for this position has not been validly transmitted from Abu Hanifa nor from any of his companions.Then he said, in sum, this answer is better left unmentioned in the books, even though some have mentioned it, and who dares to say of Abu Hurairah that he was not a jurist? And even if we granted this, it is also related by the most learned of them in jurisprudence, meaning Ibn Masud, and so the objection returns. End of quote. Faid Bari (3/229).I add to this that Abu Hurairah was not alone in narrating this hadith, just as he was not alone in most of his narrations according to my study, and even though there is some discussion regarding the narrations of others, the underlying evidence indicates that the hadith came through various routes, and Abu Hurairah was among those who preserved the hadith exactly as he heard it, while others may not have preserved it as well.