Azami 6083

Tahawi narrated it in his Mushkil (2852), Darimi (3076), and Bayhaqi (10/296), all of them from the hadith of Abu Naeem, who said, "Abdul-Aziz bin Umar bin Abdul-Aziz narrated to us, from Abdullah bin Mawhab, who said, 'I heard Tamim Dari,'" and he related it as mentioned.Ibn Majah narrated it (2752) from Abu Bakr bin Abu Shayba, and it is also in his Musannaf (11/408). He said, "Waki narrated to us, from Abdul-Aziz bin Umar, with his chain, in the same manner."Tirmidhi narrated it (2112) through Abu Usama, Ibn Numayr, and Waki, all of them from Abdul-Aziz bin Umar bin Abdul-Aziz, from Abdullah bin Mawhab. Some of them said, "from Abdullah bin Mawhab, from Tamim Dari, who said, 'I asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ,'" and he related it as mentioned.Abu Dawud narrated it (2918) from Yazid bin Khalid bin Mawhab Ramli and Hisham bin Ammar, who both said, "Yahya" - Abu Dawud said, "he is Ibn Hamza" - "narrated to us, from Abdul-Aziz bin Umar, who said, 'I heard Abdullah bin Mawhab narrating to Umar bin Abdul-Aziz, from Qabisa bin Zuayb'" - Hisham said, "from Tamim Dari, that he said, 'O Messenger of Allah,'" while Yazid said, "that Tamim said, 'O Messenger of Allah, what is the sunnah regarding a man who becomes Muslim at the hands of a Muslim man?'" He said, "He is the most entitled of people to his life and his death." Tahawi also narrated it through Hisham bin Ammar in his Mushkil (2854). Hisham bin Ammar is daif, but he was corroborated, Yazid bin Khalid corroborated him.Tahawi also narrated it (2853), as did Hakim (2/219), through Abdul-Ala bin Mushir Ghassani, who said, "Yahya bin Hamza Hadrami narrated to us," who said, "Abdul-Aziz bin Umar bin Abdul-Aziz narrated to me, from Abdullah bin Mawhab, from Qabisa bin Zuayb, from Tamim Dari, who said, 'I asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ,'" and he related it as mentioned. Hakim said, after narrating it from the hadith of Abdullah bin Wahb, from Tamim, "This is a hadith sahih in its chain according to the standard of Muslim, though the two of them did not include it. Abdullah bin Wahb bin Zama is well known, and its corroborating witness concerning Tamim Dari is the hadith of Qabisa bin Zuayb." Then he narrated it through his route.But Shafii said, "This hadith is not established. It is only narrated by Abdul-Aziz bin Umar, from Ibn Mawhab, from Tamim Dari, and Ibn Mawhab is not known to us, nor do we know that he ever met Tamim. Something like this is not established either with us or with you, since he is unknown, and I do not know it to be connected."Yaqub bin Sufyan said, "This is a mistake. Ibn Mawhab did not hear from Tamim, nor did he ever meet him." Bayhaqi mentioned this.Tirmidhi said, "This is a hadith we do not know except through the hadith of Abdullah bin Mawhab, though it is also said to be Ibn Wahb, from Tamim Dari. Some of them inserted 'Qabisa bin Zuayb' between Abdullah bin Wahb and Tamim Dari, but this is not correct. Yahya bin Hamza narrated it, from Abdul-Aziz bin Umar, and added in it 'Qabisa bin Zuayb.' The practice among some of the people of knowledge is based on this hadith, though in my view it is not connected. Some of them said his inheritance is placed in the treasury, and this is the view of Shafii, who argued using the hadith of the Prophet ﷺ, 'Guardianship belongs only to the one who freed the slave.'" This is the end of Tirmidhi's statement.Bukhari mentioned, in the Book of Inheritance Shares, "Chapter, if a man becomes Muslim at someone's hands. Hasan held that he has no guardianship over him. It is mentioned, as a raised report, from Tamim Dari, who said, 'He is the most entitled of people to his life and his death.' They differed concerning the soundness of this report." This is the end of Bukhari's statement.This is indeed correct, that people differed concerning the soundness of this report, except that Bukhari stated definitively in his Tarikh (5/199) that it is not sahih, because it conflicts with the hadith, "Guardianship belongs only to the one who freed the slave." Ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Bari (12/47), "It can be understood from this that even if its chain were sahih, it would not withstand this hadith. And even granting that, there remains uncertainty in how to reconcile the two, whether the general application of the hadith agreed upon as sahih should be restricted by this one, so that whoever becomes Muslim is excepted from it, or whether the entitlement in his saying, 'the most entitled of people,' should be interpreted to mean support and assistance and the like, not inheritance, in which case the hadith agreed upon as sahih remains in its general application. The majority inclined toward the second view, and its preponderance is evident." That is, assuming the report to be sahih, and that it does not conflict with the hadith, "Guardianship belongs only to the one who freed the slave."Abu Zura Dimashqi, Yaqub bin Sufyan, Hakim, and others graded this report sahih.Ibn Qayyim said in Tahzib Sunan (4/186), "The hadith of Tamim, even if it is not at the rank of sahih, does not fall below the lowest degrees of hasan. It is supported by the mursal report" - meaning by this the mursal report of Saeed bin Musayab - "and by the ruling of Umar bin Khattab and Umar bin Abdul-Aziz regarding the narration on inheritance shares. It only requires giving precedence to relatives over him, and does not indicate that he should not inherit at all if the deceased has no lineage heirs." He also said, "This hadith was held by Ishaq bin Rahawayh, by Ahmad bin Hanbal in one of the two narrations from him, by Tawus, Rabia, and Layth bin Saad, and it is the view of Umar bin Khattab and Umar bin Abdul-Aziz." End of his statement.In the Musannaf of Ibn Abu Shayba, from Abdul-Salam bin Harb, from Khaseef, from Mujahid, a man came to Umar and said, "A man became Muslim at my hands, and left behind a thousand dirhams, and I felt uneasy about taking it." Umar said, "Tell me, if he had committed an offense, upon whom would the liability have fallen?" He said, "Upon me." Umar said, "Then his inheritance is yours."I say, this was also the view of Shurayh, and it was the view of the Hanafis, except that they required a mutual pact of alliance.Tahawi said, "Umar bin Abdul-Aziz held to this hadith, for he ruled accordingly regarding a man who became Muslim at the hands of a Muslim man, then died, leaving behind property and a daughter. He gave the daughter half, and gave the rest to the one at whose hands he had become Muslim. Among those who held this view were Rabia bin Abu Abdul-Rahman and Saeed bin Musayab. Others held - and they are the majority of scholars besides those mentioned - that a man's becoming Muslim at another man's hands does not obligate patronage over him for that man, unless he later forms an alliance with him, in which case he becomes his patron, just as he would become his patron had he formed the alliance without having become Muslim at his hands beforehand. This is the doctrine of the Kufans. This view is also reported from Ibn Shihab Zuhri, that he was asked about a man who became Muslim and then formed an alliance with another man, whether there was any harm in that, and he said, 'There is no harm in it. Umar bin Khattab permitted that.'" Tahawi, in his Mushkil (7/282–283).Ibn Turkmani said in Jawhar Naqi (10/297–298), "In Tahzib by Ibn Jareer Tabari, Khaseef narrated from Mujahid, who said, 'A man came to Umar and said, "A man became Muslim at my hands, then died, and left behind a thousand dirhams, so to whom does his inheritance belong?"' He said, 'Tell me, if he had committed an offense, who would have borne the liability on his behalf?' He said, 'I would.' He said, 'Then his inheritance is yours.' Masruq narrated it from Ibn Masud, and it was also said by Ibrahim, Ibn Musayab, Hasan, Makhul, and Umar bin Abdul-Aziz. In Istidhkar, this is the view of Abu Hanifa and his two companions, and Rabia. Yahya bin Saeed said, concerning the hostile disbeliever, if he becomes Muslim at the hand of a Muslim. It is reported from Umar, Uthman, Ali, and Ibn Masud that they permitted the alliance, and granted inheritance through it, and Layth held this too, and a similar view is reported from Ataa, Zuhri, and Makhul. From Ibn Musayab, 'Whatever man has someone become Muslim at his hands, if he bears the liability on his behalf, he inherits from him, and if he does not bear the liability on his behalf, he does not inherit from him.' A group held this view. According to Abu Hanifa and his companions, if someone became Muslim at his hands, and he neither bore the liability on his behalf nor formed an alliance with him, then he neither inherits from him nor bears the liability on his behalf, but if he formed an alliance with him on the condition that he would bear the liability on his behalf and inherit from him, then he inherits from him and bears the liability on his behalf. This is the view of Hakam, Hammad, and Ibrahim. All of this applies when the deceased has no paternal relatives." End of Ibn Turkmani's statement.It appears from this discussion that the hadith was acted upon during the first and second centuries, and no one disputed it. The disagreement only arose in the early third century, and perhaps Shafii was the first to speak against it, rejecting it both in chain and in text.As for what is reported from Amr bin As, that he came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and said, "A man became Muslim at my hands, and he had property, and he has now died." He said, "Then his inheritance is yours." In it there is an unknown man that Hafiz Haythami did not notice. Ishaq bin Rahawayh narrated it in his Musnad, "Baqiya bin Walid narrated to us, Kathir bin Mura Nahrani narrated to me, an elder from Bahila narrated to us, from Amr bin As," and he related it as mentioned. Tabarani narrated it in his Mujam through the route of Ishaq, as in Nasb Raya (4/158).I say, in the chain there is an unknown man, namely the elder from Bahila. As for the statement of Haythami in Majmaa (4/232), "From the narration of Baqiya, who said, 'Kathir bin Mura narrated to me,' if he indeed heard from him, then the hadith is sahih," this is not correct, because of the presence of an unknown man in the chain.