Azami 6079

Abu Dawud (2911) narrated it from Musa bin Ismail, who said, Hammad told us, from Muallam, from Amr bin Shuayb with his chain of transmission. Imam Ahmad (6664) and Bayhaqi (6/218) both narrated it from the hadith of Sufyan, from Yaqub bin Ataa and others, from Amr bin Shuayb with his chain of transmission, in similar wording. Yaqub bin Ataa is Ibn Abu Rabah al-Makki. Ibn Main, Abu Zura, and Nasai declared him daif. Ahmad said, "His hadith is munkar." However, he was not alone in narrating it, for others corroborated him, as Ahmad himself said regarding the chain mentioned, and he was correct in saying so. Abu Dawud narrated it from Habib al-Muallam, from Amr. Ibn Majah (2731) narrated it from Muhammad bin Rumh, who said, Ibn Lahia informed us, from Khalid bin Zayd, that Muthanna bin Sabbah told him, from Amr bin Shuayb with his chain of transmission, in similar wording. There is well-known criticism of Ibn Lahia, but he was corroborated here. The conclusion is that its chain is hasan on account of Amr bin Shuayb.As for what has been narrated from Amr bin Shuayb, who said, My father informed me, from my grandfather Abdullah bin Amr, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ stood up on the day of the conquest of Makkah and said, "Followers of two different religions do not inherit from one another, and a wife inherits from her husband's blood-money and property, and he inherits from her blood-money and property, so long as neither of them kills the other intentionally. If one of them kills the other intentionally, she does not inherit anything from his blood-money or property. And if one of them kills the other by mistake, she inherits from his property but does not inherit from his blood-money," this is daif. Daraqutni (4/72–73) narrated it from Muhammad bin Jafar al-Mutayri, who said, Ismail bin Abdullah bin Maymun told us, who said, Ubaydullah bin Musa told us, who said, Hasan bin Salih told us, from Muhammad bin Saeed, from Amr bin Shuayb, my father informed me, from my grandfather Abdullah bin Amr, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ stood up, and he related it. Daraqutni said, Muhammad bin Saeed al-Taifi is trustworthy.But Ibn Majah (2736) narrated it from Ali bin Muhammad and Muhammad bin Yahya, who both said, Ubaydullah bin Musa told us, from Hasan bin Salih, from Muhammad bin Saeed. And Muhammad bin Yahya said, from Umar bin Saeed, from Amr bin Shuayb with his chain of transmission. Ibn Jarud (967) also narrated it from Muhammad bin Yahya, who said, Ubaydullah bin Musa told us, who said, Hasan bin Salih informed us, from Umar bin Saeed, from Amr bin Shuayb with his chain of transmission, in similar wording. Daraqutni likewise narrated it following the first narration, but he omitted the chain after Hasan bin Salih, saying only, with his chain of transmission, in similar wording, meaning from Muhammad bin Saeed, from Amr bin Shuayb. And he said, Muhammad bin Saeed al-Taifi is trustworthy.So is Muhammad bin Saeed the same person as Umar bin Saeed, or are they two different men? Those who held that they are one and the same declared this chain daif, saying that Muhammad bin Saeed is Ibn Hassan bin Qays al-Asadi al-Shami, the crucified one, whom scholars have accused of lying, since among his narrators is Hasan bin Salih bin Huyayy. Those who held that they are two different men said that Muhammad bin Saeed is al-Taifi, whom Daraqutni deemed trustworthy, while others said his hadith is hasan. However, Mizzi did not mention Hasan bin Salih among those who narrated from him, nor did he mention Amr bin Shuayb among his teachers. The stronger likelihood is that he is the crucified one. Hence Dhahabi said, "This is a munkar report." See his Tanqih (7/69). Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm likewise declared it daif in his book on inheritance law, as Ibn Abdul-Hadi stated in Tanqih (4/259).