Azami 8164

Abu Dawud (3037) and Bayhaqi (9/186) narrated it through Muhammad bin Ishaq, who said, on the authority of Asim bin Umar, from Anas bin Malik, and from Uthman bin Abu Sulayman, and they both mentioned it. Its chain contains Muhammad bin Ishaq, who is a mudallis, and he transmitted using "an" (without specifying direct hearing). However, Bayhaqi (9/187) narrated through Ibn Ishaq, who said, Yazid bin Ruman and Abdullah bin Abu Bakr told me, and they both mentioned a story ending with the portion mentioned above. Yazid bin Ruman and Abdullah bin Abu Bakr (who is the son of Muhammad bin Amr bin Hazm) are among the Tabiin. By combining the two chains, the hadith becomes hasan, and this is what Ibn Mulaqqin did in Badr Munir.As for what is narrated from Ali bin Abu Talib, that he said, "If I remain alive for the Christians of Banu Taghlib, I will surely kill their fighters and take their offspring captive, for I wrote the document between them and the Prophet on condition that they would not baptize their children as Christians", this is munkar. It was narrated by Abu Dawud (3040), by Aqeeli in his entry on Abdul-Rahman bin Hani Nakhai in his book of weak narrators (2/349-350), and by Bayhaqi (9/217), all of them through Abu Naeem Abdul-Rahman bin Hani Nakhai, who said, Sharik informed us, from Ibrahim bin Muhajir, from Ziyad bin Hudayr, who said, Ali said, and he mentioned it.Abu Dawud said afterward, "This is a munkar hadith. It has reached me from Ahmad that he used to strongly reject this hadith." Abu Ali Lului, the narrator of the Sunan, said afterward, "Abu Dawud did not read it in the second recitation." Its chain contains Abdul-Rahman bin Hani Kufi, whom Ahmad bin Hanbal, Abu Dawud, Nasai, and others declared daif, and Ibn Main declared a liar. Daraqutni said, "Discarded." Bukhari said, "There is something questionable about him, though originally he was truthful." The chain also contains Sharik, who had poor memory, and Ibrahim bin Muhajir, whom more than one of the imams also declared daif.The well-known account is that it was Umar who made the treaty with them, as mentioned by Abu Ubayd in his book Al-Amwal (1/74), with his chain, from Zuraah bin Numan or Numan bin Zuraah, that he asked Umar bin Khattab and spoke to him about the Christians of Banu Taghlib. He said that Umar had intended to take jizya from them, so they scattered across the lands. Numan bin Zuraah said to Umar, "O Commander of the Faithful, Banu Taghlib are an Arab people who disdain paying jizya, and they have no wealth, they are only people of farming and livestock, and they have a strong sting against the enemy, so do not help your enemy against yourself by driving them away." He said, so Umar made peace with them on condition that the sadaqah be doubled on them, and he stipulated that they not baptize their children as Christians.Banu Taghlib bin Waail bin Rabia bin Nizar were pure Arabs who, in the pre-Islamic era, had converted to Christianity. They were a great tribe with considerable strength, and they remained so until Islam came, at which point they were reconciled on the basis of doubling the sadaqah upon them in place of jizya. Ahkam Ahl Dhimmah (1/75-80).