Azami 6766

Abu Dawud (3616), Ibn Majah (2329), Ahmad (10347), Daraqutni (4/211), and Bayhaqi (10/525) all reported it through various chains from Saeed bin Abu Aruba, from Qatada, from Khilas, from Abu Rafi, from Abu Hurairah, who narrated it. Its isnad is sahih. Khilas is Ibn Amr, the Hajari, the Basran. Abu Hatim said, he is not strong, but the majority of scholars consider him trustworthy, and he is among the narrators relied upon by the compilers of the major hadith collections.Shafii, Ahmad, and others held the view indicated by this hadith concerning istihaam, which is drawing lots. That is, the two parties draw lots, and whichever of them the lot falls to takes an oath and receives what he claimed. Something similar was reported from Ali bin Abu Talib concerning two men who disputed over a mule. Each of them brought witnesses, and they refused to settle. He said, one of the two disputants should swear that it is his mule, that he neither sold it nor gave it away, and if you dispute over which of you should swear, I will draw lots between you over the oath, and whichever of you the lot falls to shall swear.Abdul-Razzaq (8/277) and Bayhaqi (10/259) both reported it through Simak bin Harb, from Hanash bin Mutamir, from Ali, who narrated it. Hanash said, he ruled accordingly, and I was present. Shafii said, "The other view is that it should be divided between them equally, because the evidence of each of them is equal."I say, this is indicated by the hadith of Abu Musa Ashari that follows, though it is defective, and Abu Hanifa held this view. See Tabyin Haqaiq (4/315–316).As for what was reported from Abu Musa, that two men brought a claim over a camel, or an animal, to the Prophet, and neither of them had evidence, so the Prophet ﷺ divided it between them, this is daif. Abu Dawud (3613) and Hakim (4/95) reported it through two chains from Ibn Abu Aruba, from Qatada, from Saeed bin Abu Burda, from his father, from his grandfather Abu Musa, who narrated the hadith. Hakim said, "It is sahih according to the standard of the two Sahihs." Hakim also said, "Hammam bin Yahya differed from Saeed bin Abu Aruba regarding the text of this hadith." He and Bayhaqi in Marifa (14/354) then reported it through Hammam bin Yahya, from Qatada, from Saeed bin Abu Burda, from his father, from Abu Musa, that two men claimed a camel, and each of them brought forward two witnesses, so the Prophet ﷺ divided it between them. Hakim said, "This hadith is also sahih according to the standard of the two Sahihs."This may be explained as referring to two separate incidents, or as a mistake. It has been faulted for having a missing link and being disconnected, and I discussed that in detail in Minna Kubra (9/240), even though Nasai deemed its isnad sound.Then Bayhaqi said in Marifa (14/355), "The basis in this chapter is the hadith of Simak bin Harb, from Tamim bin Tarafa, that two men disputed before the Messenger of Allah ﷺ over a camel. Each of them brought forward two witnesses, so he ruled that it be divided between them equally." He said, "This is disconnected, because Tamim bin Tarafa, the Tai, the Kufan, narrates from Adi bin Hatim and Jabir bin Samura, and he is among the later Successors."Shafii said, "Tamim is an unknown man, and an unknown narrator, even if no one contradicts him, his narration cannot serve as proof." Tirmidhi said in Ilal al-Kabir (1/565), "I asked Bukhari about the hadith of Saeed bin Abu Aruba, from Qatada..." He said, "This hadith goes back to the hadith of Simak bin Harb, from Tamim bin Tarafa." He said, it was reported from Hammad bin Salama, who said, Simak bin Harb said, "I narrated this hadith to Abu Burda." Bayhaqi said, "Shuba's narrating this hadith as mursal, from Qatada, from Saeed bin Abu Burda, from his father, in the narration of Ghundar from him, is like an indication of that."Likewise, what was reported from Zayd bin Arqam is not sound. He said, I was sitting with the Prophet ﷺ when a man from Yemen came and said, three men from the people of Yemen came to Ali disputing over a child, having all had intercourse with a woman during a single period of purity. He said to two of them, concede the child to this one. They refused. Then he said to two of them, concede the child to this one. They refused. Then he said to two of them, concede the child to this one. They refused.So he said, "You are quarreling partners. I am going to draw lots between you. Whoever wins the draw gets the child, and owes his two partners two-thirds of the blood-money." So he drew lots between them and gave the child to whoever won the draw. The Prophet ﷺ laughed until his molars, or his back teeth, showed.Abu Dawud (2269), Nasai (3489), Hakim (2/207), and Ahmad (19342) all reported it from Ajlah, from Shaybi, from Abdullah bin Khalil, from Zayd bin Arqam, who narrated it, and the wording is that of Abu Dawud. Ajlah is Ibn Abdullah bin Hujayya Kindi. Abu Dawud, Nasai, Ibn Saad, and others graded him daif, while Ibn Main considered him strong, except that his narration is not accepted when he contradicts others.There is considerable disagreement regarding Shaybi's narration, resembling inconsistency, since these chains cannot be reconciled. The sahih version among them is what Salama bin Kuhayl narrated from him, from Abu Khalil, from Ali bin Abu Talib, stopped at him, and this is more sahih. It was likewise reported by Abu Dawud (2271), Nasai (3492), and Bayhaqi (10/267). Nasai said, "This is correct." He said in Sunan al-Kubra (5684), "All these hadiths have inconsistent chains, and Salama bin Kuhayl is the most reliable of them, so his hadith is more likely to be correct."Daraqutni mentioned in his Ilal (3/117) the disagreement among these narrations, and both Abu Hatim and Aqeeli, among others, judged them to be inconsistent. Abu Hatim considered the stopped version to be correct.