Azami 8163

Bukhari narrated it in the chapter on jizya (3156-3157) from Ali bin Abdullah, [who said] Sufyan narrated to us, [who] said, I heard Amr say, then he mentioned it.Abu Dawud (3043) also narrated it from Musaddad bin Musarhad, [who said] Sufyan narrated to us, from Amr bin Dinar, who heard Bajala narrating to Amr bin Aws and Abu Shatha. He said, I was a scribe for Jaz bin Muawiya, the uncle of Ahnaf bin Qays, when a letter came to us from Umar a year before his death, "Kill every sorcerer, separate every Zoroastrian from the relative he has unlawfully married, and forbid them from their murmuring." So we killed three sorcerers in one day, and we separated every Zoroastrian man from his unlawful wife in accordance with the Book of Allah. He prepared abundant food and invited them, placing the sword across his thigh, so they ate without murmuring, and they brought forth the load of a mule or two mules' worth of silver. Umar had not taken jizya from the Zoroastrians until Abdul-Rahman bin Awf testified that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ had taken it from the Zoroastrians of Hajar. Its chain is sahih.Of similar meaning is what Shafii narrated in Al-Umm (4/174) from Malik, it is also in Muwatta (1/278), from Jafar bin Muhammad bin Ali, from his father, that Umar bin Khattab mentioned the Zoroastrians and said, "I do not know how to deal with their matter." Abdul-Rahman bin Awf said, "I testify that I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say, 'Treat them as you would treat the People of the Book.'" Shafii said, this chain is interrupted, meaning that Muhammad did not hear from Umar bin Khattab.As for what was narrated from Ibn Abbas, who said, A man from the Asbadhiyyin, from the people of Bahrain, who were the Zoroastrians of the people of Hajar, came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and stayed with him, then left. I asked him, "What did Allah and His Messenger decide concerning you?" He said, "Something bad." I said, "What is it?" He said, "Islam or death." He said, Abdul-Rahman bin Awf then said, "Jizya was accepted from them." Ibn Abbas said, So the people took the statement of Abdul-Rahman bin Awf and left aside what I myself heard from the Asbadhi. This is not sahih.Abu Dawud (3044), Daraqutni (2/155), and Bayhaqi (9/190) narrated it via Hushaym, [who said] Dawud bin Abu Hind informed us, from Qushayr bin Amr, from Bajala bin Abda, from Ibn Abbas, who said, then he mentioned it. In its chain is Qushayr bin Amr, whom Daraqutni said is majhul (unknown), as stated in Mizan.Bayhaqi said, following the aforementioned hadith, "How good is what they did, abandoning the narration of the Zoroastrian Asbadhi and taking up the narration of Abdul-Rahman bin Awf , for he may have judged between them according to what the Asbadhi said, then revelation came to him with the acceptance of jizya from them, so he accepted it, as Abdul-Rahman bin Awf said. And Allah knows best."On this subject is also what was narrated from Ibn Abbas, who said, Abu Talib fell ill, and Quraysh came to him, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ came to visit him. At his head was a seat occupied by a man, and Abu Jahl got up and sat in it. They said, "Your nephew disparages our gods." He said, "What is the matter with your people, that they complain about you?" He said, "Uncle, I want them to accept one word, by which the Arabs will submit to them and the non-Arabs will pay them jizya." He said, "What is it?" He said, "There is no god but Allah." So they got up, saying, "Has he made the gods into one god?" He said, and there was revealed, "Sad. By the Quran, full of reminder" [Sad 38:1], and he recited it until he reached, "Indeed, this is an amazing thing" [Sad 38:5].Tirmidhi (3232) and Ahmad (2008) narrated it, and Ibn Hibban (6686) and Hakim (2/432) graded it sahih, all of them through the hadith of Amash, from Yahya bin Umara, from Saeed bin Jubayr, from Ibn Abbas, who mentioned it as part of a long story. Tirmidhi said, a hasan hadith. Hakim graded it sahih.I say, in its chain is Yahya bin Umara, also said to be Ibn Abbad, and also said to be Ubada al-Kufi, from whom no one narrated except Amash, and no one declared him reliable except Ibn Hibban. This is why Hafiz [Ibn Hajar] said in Taqrib, "Acceptable," meaning when corroborated.Ibn Jareer narrated it in his Tafsir through several routes, one of which is mursal. So the chain is not free from criticism, though the story gained fame in the books of history and biography. See Minna Kubra (8/133).The scholars differed as to from whom jizya is to be taken. Malik held that it is taken from all disbelievers and polytheists, based on the general evidence from the sunnah, and on the apparent meaning of the hadith of Burayda.Abu Hanifa said, it is taken from the People of the Book, the Zoroastrians, and the idol-worshippers among the non-Arabs, but not from the idol-worshippers among the Arabs. Ahmad stated the same in one narration from him.Shafii said, jizya is taken from the People of the Book, whether Arab or non-Arab, and from those resembling them such as the Zoroastrians, but it is not taken from idol-worshippers, whether Arab or non-Arab, because in his view jizya is based on religion, not lineage.Hafiz bin Qayyim said in his book Ahl Dhimma (1/6), supporting the first view, "So it is taken from the People of the Book on the basis of the Quran, and from disbelievers in general on the basis of the sunnah. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ took it from the Zoroastrians, who are fire-worshippers, and there is no difference between them and idol-worshippers. It is not correct that they are among the People of the Book, nor did they have a scripture. Had the companions considered them People of the Book, Umar would not have hesitated regarding their matter, and the Prophet ﷺ would not have said, 'Treat them as you would treat the People of the Book.'"Rather, this indicates that they are not People of the Book. So if jizya is taken from fire-worshippers, what difference is there between them and idol-worshippers? [End of quote.]