Azami 7322

Abu Dawud Tayalisi (388) narrated it from Zuhayr, from Abu Ishaq, from Saad bin Ayyad, from Abdullah, and he mentioned it. Abu Dawud (3780-3781), Tirmidhi in Shamail (170), Nasai in Kubra (6620), and Ahmad (3733) narrated it through his route. Nasai included only the first half of it.Its isnad is hasan because of Saad bin Ayyad Thumali, whose status as a companion is disputed, though the correct view is that he was a follower who narrated from the Prophet ﷺ as a mursal report. Ibn Saad said, "He narrated few hadiths," and Ibn Hibban deemed him trustworthy, while in Taqrib he is described as "truthful."Zuhayr is Ibn Muawiya, and although his hearing from Abu Ishaq came late in his life, he was corroborated on the second half of the hadith. Ahmad (3778) narrated it from Aswad, who said, Israil narrated to us, from Abu Ishaq, with this wording, "Indeed some eloquence is a form of magic." He said, "And we used to think that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ was poisoned through a sheep's shoulder, which the Jews had poisoned."As for what was narrated from Ayesha, that she said, "The shoulder was not the meat most beloved to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, but he rarely got meat, so he would hasten to eat it because it cooked faster than other parts," this is daif. Tirmidhi (1838) narrated it from Hasan bin Muhammad Zafarani, who said, Yahya bin Abbad Abu Abbad narrated to us, who said, Fulayh bin Sulayman narrated to us, from Abdul-Wahhab bin Yahya, one of the descendants of Abbad bin Abdullah bin Zubayr, from Abdullah bin Zubayr, from Ayesha, and he mentioned it.Tirmidhi said, "This is a hasan hadith, we do not know it except through this route." In one copy it reads, "A gharib hadith we do not know it..." This latter judgment is closer to being correct, because Fulayh bin Sulayman has some weakness in his memory and was not corroborated on this report. His teacher Abdul-Wahhab bin Yahya was deemed trustworthy by no one except Ibn Hibban, while Abu Hatim called him merely "a shaykh," and Hafiz classes him as "acceptable," meaning acceptable when corroborated, otherwise his hadith is weak.Likewise, what is narrated from Abdullah bin Jafar, that he heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say, while the people were placing meat before the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, "The best meat is the meat of the back," is not sound. Ibn Majah (3308), Ahmad (1744), Nasai in Kubra (6623), and Hakim (4/111) narrated it through various routes from Yahya bin Saeed, who said, Masaar narrated to us, from a man from Fahm, from Abdullah bin Jafar, and he mentioned it. Hakim also narrated it through the route of Jareer, from Raqaba bin Masqala, from a man from Banu Fahm, from Abdullah bin Jafar, and he mentioned it. Hakim said, "The report has been confirmed sahih through both isnads."I say, it is not as he claimed, because it all hinges on the man from Fahm. Masaar said, in Ahmad's narration, "Muhammad bin Abdul-Rahman," adding, "I think he was from Hijaz." I say, no confirmation of his trustworthiness is known, so he is counted among the unknown narrators.Someone once asked me, "What is permissible for us to eat from sheep, cattle, and camels?" The answer is that it is permissible to eat everything except flowing blood, based on Allah's saying, "Say, 'I do not find in what has been revealed to me anything forbidden to one who would eat it, except that it be a dead animal, or blood poured forth, or the flesh of swine, for indeed it is impure, or that which has been dedicated to other than Allah in sinful transgression. But whoever is forced by necessity, neither desiring it nor transgressing, then indeed your Lord is Forgiving and Merciful.'" [Anam 6:145]Some scholars found it repugnant to eat the testicles, the male reproductive organ, the female genitalia, and the glands, and so they deemed eating them disliked. I say, the default ruling is permissibility, so whoever does not find it agreeable should simply not eat it, but it should not be classed as disliked, because the ruling of "disliked" requires legal evidence.