The Prophetic Constitution of Madinah by Dr Muhammad Al-Massari

The one named Abdul Qadir Al-Muhammadi, who wrote on the Ahl ul-Hadith platform on the date 19/03/2007, when discussing the chains of transmission of the Sahifa (document) of Al-Madinah, in imitation to Al-Hafizh Ibn Hajar, stated: [As for Uthman bin Muhammad bin Mughirah Al-Akhnas Ath-Thaqafi Al-Hijazi, then he is a Saduq (truthful person) who has Awham (erroneous narrations) and Manaakir (Hadith rejected by others)]. This was also recorded in the archives of the Ahl ul-Hadith portal in the Shamela e-library (2 - 51/390). Even the wording “Manaakir” employed here, was taken from another source and was not from the speech of Al-Hafizh Ibn Hajar. It may therefore be more appropriate to begin with the summary of Ibn Hajar as found in his “Taqrib At- Tahdhib” and then follow that directly by correcting it in a concise manner following the same methodology as “Taqrib At-Tahdhib”, before going on to provide detailed evidence establishing the validity of our correction:

- The following was stated in “At-Taqrib At-Tahdhib” (1/386/4515): [Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq Ath-Thaqafi Al-Akhnasi (Hijazi) is Saduq who had Awham, from the sixth (i.e. level of transmission)].

- This represents an error and major omission from Al-Hafizh and it was correct for it to have been said: [Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al- Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq Ath-Thaqafi Al-Akhnasi (Madaniy) is a Thiqah (trustworthy - reliable) Faqih (jurist), a scholar in Al-Maghazi and history, from the fourth (i.e. level of transmission)]. In addition, he is normally mentioned by the name: Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, or Utham bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah, or Uthman Al-Akhnasi. In the following section we will make clear by way of evidence every part of our statement, word for word. We will first present the texts of the Imams concerning this man:

- The following came stated in “At-Tarikh Al-Kabir” (6/249/2305):

[Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas bin Sariq Ath- Thaqafi Al-Akhnasiy (Hijazi) related from Sa’id Al-Maqbari and Az- Zuhriy. Az-Zuhri, Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami and Muhammad bin ‘Amr bin ‘Alqamah related from him]. I say: Here, Al-Bukhari did not assert authoritatively that Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi heard (directly) from Sa’id Al-Maqbari.

- In “Al-‘Ilal Al-Kabir” by At-Tirmidhi (161) 273), the following came stated:

“Muhammad bin Yahya related to us from Mu’alla bin Mansur, from Abdullah bin Ja’far Al- Makhrami, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al- Akhnasi, from Sa’id Al-Maqbari, from Abu Hurairah, who said:

“That the Prophet (peace be upon him) cursed the man who married a woman in order to divorce her so that she may go back to her first husband and the man (the first husband) for whom that is done”.

I asked Muhammad about this Hadith and he said: “It is a Hasan Hadith: Abdullah bin Ja’far Al- Makhrami is Saduq Thiqah, Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi is Thiqah, and I used to believe that Uthman had not heard (directly) from Sa’id Al-Maqbari” [End of Quote].

I say: Here, Al-Bukhari verified that Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al- Mughirah Al-Akhnasi heard (directly) from Sa’id Al-Maqbari and asserted its solidity authoritatively.

- The following came stated in “At-Tabaqat Al-Kubra” [Mutammim At-Tabi’in] (p: 271):

[Muhammad bin ‘Umar related from Abdur Rahman bin Abu Az-Zinad from his father, who said: “They were ten sitting in a single sitting who were known by it. They included among them Ya’qub bin ‘Utbah and none of them had as many virtues as him, not even the sound of a cat could be heard in his house”. Muhammd bin ‘Umar said: “Those ten were of the same age group, they were Fuqahaa’ (jurists) and ‘Ulamaa’ (Scholars). They included: Ya’qub bin ‘Utbah, Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Akhnas, Abdullah, Abdur Rahman, Al-Harith Banu ‘Ikramah bin Abdur Rahman bin Al-Harith bin Hisham, Sa’d bin Ibrahim, As-Salt bin Zabid, Salih bin Kaisan, Abdullah bin Yazid bin Hurmuz and Abdullah bin Yazid Al-Hudhiliy. Ya’qub was Thiqah (trustworthy – reliable), he had many Ahadeeth, knowledge of transmission and Seerah among other areas].

- The following was also stated in “At-Tabaqat Al-Kubra” [Mutammim At-Tabi’in] (p: 327):

[233 – (He is) Abdullah bin Yazid bin Hurmuz the Mawla of Ad- Dawsiyin and who was known by the Kunya (name by first son or daughter) of Abu Bakr. His father was responsible for the Mawali on the day of Al-Harrah. Muhammad bin ‘Umar related from Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Kathir bin As-Salt who said: “Abdullah bin Yazid bin Hurmuz used to have gathered at his house at Bani Laith Al-Harith and Abdullah the sons of ‘Ikramah bin Abdur Rahman, Sa’d bin Ibrahim, Salih bin Kaisan, Rabi’ah, Abu ‘Ubaidah bin Muhammad ‘Ammar bin Yasir and As-Salt bin Zabid. They would talk about Fiqh and narrate (or speak) to one another”. He said: “They did not depart from each other except for food”. Abdullah bin Wahb related from Bakr bin Mudar who said: Abdullah bin Yazid bin Hurmuz said: “I did not learn knowledge any day that I learned except (that it was) for myself”. It was related from Mutarrif bin Abdullah Al-Yasari that he said: I heard Malik bin Anas saying: “The people used to wear turbans and they included among them Abdullah bin Yazid bin Hurmuz”. Mutarrif bin Abdullah related from Anas bin Malik that he said: “Abdullah bin Yazid bin Hurmuz was very deaf”. Al-Mutarrif said: “I saw him and met with him when I was young and he was from among the people of piety”] [End of Quote]. I say: Uthman bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi was therefore not an unknown person. Rather, he was the tenth from among the ten ‘Ulamaa’ (scholars) and Fuqahaa’ (jurists) of Al-Madinah who were similar in age. He is therefore in the category or level of his paternal uncle the Thiqah (trustworthy – reliable) jurist Ya’qub bin ‘Utbah bin Al-Maghirah bin Al-Akhnas, the Imam Sa’d bin Ibrahim and their likes. It is proper to categorize all of them to be from the fifth (i.e. level of transmission) [The children of the Tabi’in] because they were born approximately in the year 50 AH. Sa’d bin Ibrahim was born in the year 53 AH and he passed away when he was 72 years old in the year 125 or 126 AH. Ya’qub bin ‘Utbah passed away in the year 128 AH but his age at passing is unknown to me. It is likely that Abdullah bin Yazid bin Hurmuz and Abdullah bin Zaid Al-Hudhiliy were the youngest from among them as the first passed away in the year 148 and the latter in the year 149 AH, whilst there ages at death have not been mentioned. However, Salih bin Kaisan saw Ibn ‘Umar and Ibn Az-Zubair (and they differed in respect to him having heard or received from them both whilst Yahya bin Ma’een affirmed that). He is therefore sub-middle of the Tabi’in i.e. from the fourth level of transmission. He was older than Az-Zuhriy but he lived to an old age meaning that his death came later until 130 AH and perhaps 140 AH. It is therefore possible that his birth was around the year 45 AH. In the same way, I find the same to be most likely in respect to Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al-Akhnasi because Az-Zuhriy related from him. He is therefore from the fourth (level of transmission) and it is very unlikely that he is from the fifth. As for him being from the sixth generation (or level of transmission), as claimed by Al-Hafizh, then that is an impossibility. And Allah knows best.

- The following came stated in “Ath-Thiqat” [by Ibn Hibban] (7/203/9683):

[Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq Ath-Thaqafi Al-Akhnasi relates from Sa’id bin Al-Maqburi and Az- Zuhriy. Muhammad bin ‘Amr bin ‘Alqamah and Abdullah bin Ja’far Al- Makhrami related from him. His Hadith from other than the narration (Riwayah) of Al-Makhrami are considered to be from him because Al-Makhrami is not anything in respect to the Hadith. Al- Baghawi related to us in Baghdad. He said: Abdullah bin ‘Umar Al- Khattabi said: Ad-Darawardiy related from Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Sa’id Al- Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah: That the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever is appointed over the judiciary has been slaughtered by other than a knife”]. I would like to quickly comment upon the statement of Ibn Hibban mentioned above “Because Al-Makhrami is not anything in respect to the Hadith” and say: Ibn Hibban was alone in respect to this view and at odds with the majority of the Imams and the authentication of Al- Bukhari of him has already preceded. - However, the following came stated in “Al-Jarh Wa-t-Ta’dil” [by Ibn Abu Hatim] (6/166/910):

[Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi. He is the son of Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq Al-Akhnasiy Ath-Thaqafi. He related from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib and Abu Dh’ib and Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami related from him. I heard my father saying that. Abu Muhammad said: And he related from Sa’id Al-Maqburi and Abdur Rahman Al-Aa’raj. Abdur Rahman said: My father mentioned that from Ishaq bin Mansur, from Yahya bin Ma’een who said: “Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi is Thiqah (trustworthy - reliable)” Abdur Rahman related to us from Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Al-Baraa’ who said: [‘Ali bin Al-Madini said that Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi related Ahadeeth Manakir (i.e. defective from an angle or unknown to others or contrary to what other Thiqat have related)] from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib from Abu Hurairah.

- The above was summarized in “Al-Kashif” [by Adh-Dhahabi] (2/13/3737):

[Uthman bin Al-Mughirah bin Al-Akhnas related from Ibn ul- Musayyib and Al-Aa’raj while Ibn Abu Dh’ib and a group related from him. He is Thiqah (trustworthy – reliable) according to Ibn Ma’een and Ibn Al-Madini said: “He related Ahadeeth Manakir (i.e. defective from an angle or unknown to others or contrary to what other Thiqat have related) (from Ibn ul-Musayyib”]. - The following is what came stated in “Al-‘Ilal” of Ibn Al-Madini (73/112):

[(Concerning) the ‘Ilal (defects) of the Hadith “Whoever is appointed over the judiciary …” ‘Ali (Al-Madini) said: (Concerning) The Hadith of the Abu Hurairah from the Prophet (peace be upon him) “Whoever is appointed over the judiciary then he has been slaughtered without a knife”. He said: It was related by Ibn Abu Dh’ib from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi and this Uthman related Hadith Manakir (i.e. defective from an angle or unknown to others or contrary to what other Thiqat have related)] from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib from Abu Hurairah. And Abdullah bin Ja’far related it contradicting Ibn Abu Dh’ib in its Isnaad (chain of transmission). He related it from Al- Akhnasi, from Al-Maqbari and Abdur Rahman Al-Aa’raj, from Abu Hurairah. And the Hadith in my view is the Hadith of Al-Maqburi. I say: This is an error and Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah did not relate anything from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib. However, the narrators were inconsistent in respect to the Hadith “Whoever is appointed over the judiciary then he has been slaughtered without a knife”. Some of them made it related from “Sa’id” bin Al-Musayyib instead of “Sa’id” bin Al-Maqburi. As a result, the Imam ‘Ali bin Al- Madini thought that this was from Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al- Mughirah, and as such he said what he said.

- The following came mentioned in “Al-‘Ilal” of Ad-Daraqutni [The defects (‘Ilal) found within the Prophetic Ahadeeth] (10/397/2082):

[He was asked concerning the Hadith of Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him): “Whoever is appointed over the judiciary then he has been slaughtered without a knife”. He said: “It is narrated by ‘Amr bin Abu ‘Amr Dawud bin Khalid bin Dinar and by ‘Umarah bin Ghaziya. Sufyan Ath-Thawri narrated it from him and who related from him has been differed upon. That is as Ibrahim bin Harasah related it from Ath-Thawri, from ‘Umarah bin Ghaziyah, from Sa’id Al-Maquri, from Abu Hurairah. Bakr bin Bakkar differed with him and Bukair was differed upon. That is as Al- Hasan Az-Za’farani related it from Bakr bin Bakkar, from Ath-Thawri, from Zaid bin Aslam, from Sa’id bin Abu Sa’id, from Abu Hurairah. Az- Za’farani said: And in it (i.e. the chain [Isnad]) was Al-Murrah, from Sa’id or Abu Sa’id; Murrah related to us from Abu Hurairah.

And ‘Umar bin Shabbah, Abu Abdullah Al-Asfatiy and Abu Al-Azhar An-Naisaburiy related it from Bakr bin Bakkar, from Ath-Thawri, from Zaid bin Aslam, from Abu Sa’id Al-Maqburi without doubt, from Abu Hurairah. And it has been said: (That it was) from Ath-Thawri, from Abu ‘Abbad Abdullah bin Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from his father, from Abu Hurairah. ‘Isam bin Yusuf said: It was from Ath-Thawri, from a man he did not name, from Al-Maqburi. And it was (also) related from Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind, and who related from him has been differed upon. That is as Kharija bin Mus’ab related it from Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind, from Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah. Safwan bin ‘Eisa differed with him. He related it from Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind, from Muhammad bin Uthman, from Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah. He meant Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi here. And Hammad bin Khalid Al-Khayyat related it from Ibn Abu Dh’ib, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi and said: From Sa’id bin Al- Musayyib, from Abu Hurairah, but he was mistaken (i.e. in respect to Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib), as it was rather Sa’id Al-Maqburi. And Yusuf bin Sayyar said: (It was related) From Uthman Al-Akhnasi, from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib in Mursal form (i.e. missing the name of the Sahabi), from the Prophet (peace be upon him). And he was mistaken in respect to his statement: Ibn ul-Musayyib.

And it was related by Abdul ‘Aziz bin Al-Muttalib, from Uthman Al- Akhnasi, from Sa’id Al-Maqburi; it was said by Al-‘Abbas bin Abu Salamah from Abdul ‘Aziz and he did not continue upon him. And Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami related it from Uthman Al-Akhnasi and he said: From Sa’id bin Al-Maqburi and Al-Aa’raj, from Abu Hurairah. And from Al-Mahfuzh from Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah].

Consequently, it can be seen that Imam Ad-Daraqutni had grasped many paths (for the Hadith) which were missed by Imam ‘Ali Al- Madini and that he ascertained that the mention of Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib was undoubtedly erroneous and that Al-Akhnasi held no responsibility for that error. The following are even more paths for this Hadith: - The following came recorded in “Akhbar Al-Qudaa” by Imam Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Khalaf bin Hayyan bin Sadaqah Ad-Dabbiy Al- Baghdadi, who was known by the title “Wakee’” [DOD: 306 AH] (1/7):

[“Whoever has been made a judge, has been slaughtered without a knife”: Al-Hasan bin Yahya bin Abu Rabi’ Al-Jurjani related from Abu ‘Amir Al-‘Aqadi, from Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Mukharimi, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Abdur Rahman Al-Aa’raj, from Abu Hurairah: That the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever has been made a judge, has been slaughtered without a knife”.

‘Eisa bin Ja’far Al-Warraq related from Mansur bin Salamah Abu Salamah Al-Khuza’iy, from Abdullah bin Ja’far, from Uthman bin Muhammad, from Al-Aa’raj and Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said:

“Whoever has been made a judge among the people, then he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

Al-‘Abbas bin Muhammad bin Hatim Ad-Dawri related from Hisham bin Ubaidullah Ar-Razi, from Abdullah bin Ja’far bin Abdur Rahman bin Al-Miswar Ibn Makhrama. From Uthman bin Muhammad, from Al-Aa’raj and Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever has been made a judge among the people, then he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

Ishaq bin Al-Hasan related from Hisham Ar-Razi; he was then confused or erred in the Isnad … He said: Hisham bin Ubaidullah bin Bilal Ar-Razi related from Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami, from Muhammad bin Ibrahim … He said: I believe it to be from Al-Muqbari and Al-Aa’raj, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him): The same Hadith (i.e. Whoever has been made a judge). His statement: Muhammad bin Ibrahim is an error and therefore the correct statement (or view) is what Ad-Dawriy said. Abdullah bin Ja’far bin Mus’ab bin Abdullah Az-Zubairi related from his grandfather, from Al-Mughira bin Abdur Rahman, from Abdullah (meaning Ibn Sa’id Ibn Abu Hind), from Uthman bin Muhammad Al- Akhnasi, from Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah: That the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever has been made a judge among the people, then he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

Isma’il bin Ishaq Al-Qadi related from Muhammad bin Abu Bakr Al- Muqaddami, from Humaid bin Al-Aswad and Safwan bin ‘Eisa, from Abdullah bin Sa’id Ibn Abu Hind, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al- Akhnasi, from Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him) who said: “Whoever has been made a judge among the people, then he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

Isma’il bin Ishaq related from Muhammad bin Abu Bakr, from Bashar bin ‘Eisa, from Ibn Abu Dh’ib, from Uthman Al-Akhnasi, from Al- Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him), who said: “Whoever has been made a judge among the people, then he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

Abu Ja’far Muhammad bin Abdur Rahman bin Nafi’ As-Sairafiy (may Allah’s mercy be upon him) related from Ma’n bin ‘Eisa, from Ibn Abu Dhi’b, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib (!!), from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him), who said: “Whoever has been made a judge then he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

‘Abbas bin Muhammad Ad-Dawri related from Abu ‘Ali Al-Hanafi Ubaidullah bin Abdul Hamid, from Isma’il bin Ishaq Al-Qadi, from Abdullah bin Maslamah Al-Qa’nabi, from Ibn Abu Dh’ib, (Al-Hanafi said) from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Sa’id, from Abu Hurairah, who said: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever has been placed over the judiciary, has been slaughtered without a knife”. And Ad-Dawry said: “Slaughtered with a knife here”. This is similarly related from Sa’id without any additional identification to the name, so I believe that he wanted to escape from saying: Ibn ul- Musayyib, because it is an error.

Abdullah bin Ayub related from Ruh, from Ibn Abu Dhi’b, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Ibn ul-Musayyib, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him said: “Whoever is appointed to the judiciary, has been slaughtered without a knife”.

Abu Bakr Ja’far bin Muhammad related from Qutaibah bin Sa’id, from Abdullah bin Nafi’, from Ibn Abu Dhi’b, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib, who said: “If a man is appointed as a judge he has been slaughtered without a knife”. Abu Bakr said: He did not go past Sa’id (in this chain) and did not raise it to the Messenger (peace be upon him).

Ahmad bin Isma’il bin Muhammad bin Nabih Abu Hudhafah As-Sahmi related to us, along time ago, from a book. He said: Abu Damrah Anas bin ‘Ayad related to me from Uthman, and he was ibn Ad-Dahhak, from Ibn ul-Musayyib, from the Prophet (peace be upon him), who said: “Whoever is made a judge, he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

Similarly, Abu Hudhafah said to us, from Ibn ul-Musayyib. Then Muhammad bin Al-Muttalib Al-Khuzaa’iy related it to me. He said: Ibrahim bin Al-Mundhir Al-Hizami related to us from Ja’far bin Al- Hasan, from Duhaim Abdur Rahman bin Ibrahim, from Abu Damrah, from Uthman bin Ad-Dahhak, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al- Akhnasi, from Sa’id, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him) … the same (i.e. Hadith).

Al-Makhrami and Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind, the Riwayah (report) of Bashar bin ‘Eisa from Ibn Abu Dh’ib, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Al-Maqburi, while Ma’n related from Abu Dh’uaib and Abu Damrah from Uthman bin Ad-Dahhak, from Al- Akhnasiy agreed when they said: “From Sayyid Al-Musayyib” while there were those who escaped from stating the son of so and so and instead just said: “From Sa’id (i.e. without further identification), from Abu Hurairah” and that was Al-Qa’nabi from Ibn Abu Dh’ib and the one who related from Abu Damrah from Al-Khuza’iy and Duhaim. And he said: Ibn Nafi’ from Ibn Abu Dh’ib, from Al-Akhnasi, from Sa’id ibn Al-Musayyib. He said: “Whoever is appointed as a judge” and he did not raise it [i.e. make it raised (Marfoo’) to the Prophet (peace be upon him)] and did not go beyond him (i.e. Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib in the chain). He said: Ruh from Ibn Abu Dh’ib, from Al-Akhnasi, from Ibn ul-Musayyib that the Prophet.

He said: Therefore, it may be that Al-Akhnasi heard it from Al- Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah and he heard it from Sa’id bin Al- Musayyib from his statement and then this confused some of those who transmitted it from him. That is as Ruh bin ‘Ubadah said: “From Ibn ul-Musayyib”, from the Prophet (peace be upon him). This indicates that Ibn Abu Dh’ib was mistaken in his statement “Ibn ul- Musayyib” if it was based upon what Ruh bin ‘Ubadah said. And I don’t know if anyone has related this speech from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib. And it being from (Sa’id bin) Al-Maqburiy has an origin to it other than the Riwayah (narration) of Al-Akhnasi. Therefore, the correct view is of those who stated: “From al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah”.

Al-Hasan bin Muhammad Az-Za’farani related from Bakr bin Bakkar, from Sufyan Ath-Thawri, from Zaid bin Aslam, from Sa’id or Abu Sa’id from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him), that he said: “Whoever is made (or appointed) as a judge, has been slaughtered by other than a knife”. It was in this way that Az- Za’farani stated it to us: “From Sa’id or Abu Sa’id” and as such he was not sure about it.

Surad bin Khimar bin Salim Abu Sahl Al-Jahbadh related it to us from the origin of his book. He said: Bakr bin Bakkar related it to us from Sufyan Ath-Thawri, from Zaid bin Aslam, from sa’id bin Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him), who said: “Whoever is made (or appointed) as a judge, has been slaughtered by other than a knife”.

Al-Harith bin Abu Usamah related to me from Abdul ‘Aziz bin Aban, from Sufyan Ath-Thawri, from Ibn Ghaziyah, from Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever is made (or appointed) as a judge, has been slaughtered by other than a knife”. He said: “Abu Bakr”: And this is an error from Abdul ‘Aziz bin Aban. (Rather) The Hadith is a Hadith of Bakr bin Bakkar.

Ibrahim bin Isma’il Al-Bazzar related to us from Abdullah bin Mu’awiyah bin Az-Zubairi, from Yusuf bin Ya’qub bin Isma’il, from Nasr bin ‘Ali, from Fadl bin Sulaiman, from ‘Amr bin Abu ‘Amr, from Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah: That the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever is appointed as a judge, has been slaughtered by other than a knife”.

Isma’il bin Ishaq bin Isma’il related to us from Yahya bin Abdul Hamid, from Dawud bin Khalid Al-‘Attar, from Sa’id bin Abu Sa’id, from the Prophet (peace be upon him): The same (i.e. Whoever is appointed as a judge …). This contains indicative evidence to support those who narrated the narration of Al-Akhnasi from Al-Maqburi.

Al-Qasim bin Hashim bin Sa’id As-Simsar related to us from Yahya bin Nadr ibn Hajib, from Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind, from his father, from Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever has been made a judge among the people, then he has been slaughtered without a knife”.

He said: Abu Bakr: I do not know anyone who related this Hadith like this (i.e. with this chain) other than Yahya bin Nadr bin Hajib and Yahya bin Nadr is feeble (نيَّ لَ ) in his Hadith. This Hadith was related by Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al- Akhnasi, from Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah. It may be that he intended that but made an error. And Al-Qasim bin Hashim As-Simsar is Thiqah (trustworthy – reliable).

Mahmud bin Muhammad bin Abu Al-Mada’ Al-Halabi related to us from Al-‘Abbas bin Al-Faraj Al-Masisi, from Dawud Az-Zabarqan, from ‘Ataa bin As-Sa’ib, from Sa’id bin Jubair, from Ibn ‘Abbas, from the Prophet (peace be upon him): “Whoever is seeks to be (or is made) a judge has been slaughtered by other than a knife”] [End of Quote].

You can see here more paths which dictate certainty (Al-Qat’) in that the mention of Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib was an error of some of the narrators. That is unless we were to accept the distant possibility that our person of concern ‘Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah Al- Akhnasi’ had indeed on occasions related it from the speech of Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib himself and then some of the narrators were confused by the matter. Even in such a case, there is no defect in relation to Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib repeating it often without a chain of transmission due to the hadith already being well-known and spread among the people, for the purpose of exhortation and making people fearful of the responsibility of the position of judiciary. The affirmation of the Hadith from Sa’id bin Abu Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah in a Marfoo’ manner [i.e. to the Prophet (peace be upon him)] is a matter that has no doubt due to the conformity of the Thiqaat (trustworthy narrators) Zaid bin Aslam, Dawud bin Khalid bin Dinar Al-‘Attar, ‘Amr bin Abu ‘Amr and perhaps ‘Umarah bin Ghaziyah, Abu Sulaiman Dawud bin ‘Ataa’ Al-Madani and Abdullah bin Sa’id bin Abu Hind (in their narrations) with (what was related by) our person of interest Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughira Al-Akhnasi (i.e. they affirmed in their reporting, like ‘Uthman Al- Akhnasi, that the Hadith was related by Sa’id bin Abu Sa’id Al- Maqburi). The invalidity or falseness is therefore established in respect to the attribution of defectiveness to the Hadith of ‘Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughira Al-Akhnasi from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib. We have searched electronically the complete collections of Hadith and we did not find that Uthman related any Hadith from Sa’id bin Al-Musayyib except for this one. In addition, the majority of the narrations (for this Hadith), with their chains, state that they were related from Sa’id Al-Maqburi from Abu Hurairah. We found many narrations of his within the books of history and Maghazi (i.e. Seera with focus upon the battles). They include among them, the following notable narration: - The following was recorded in “Tarikh ul-Madinah” by Ibn Shabbah (1/113):

[Muhammad bin Yahya related from Abdul ‘Aziz bin ‘Imran, from his father, from Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughira bin Al-Akhnas bin Shariq Ath-Thaqafi, from his mother Hukaimah, who said: “I was with the four who buried Uthman bin ‘Affan, may Allah be pleased with him: Jubair bin Mut’im, Hakim bin Hizam, Abu Jahm bin Hudhaifah and Nayyar bin Mukram Al-Aslami. They carried him across the door whilst I heard his head rap upon the door as if it was a pumpkin saying ‘dub’ ‘dub’, until they reached Hushsh Kawkab. He was then buried, the wall was demolished over him and he was prayed upon”. Hushsh Kawkab place at the base of the wall which is in the east of Al-Baqi’ (burial ground) and known as Khadra’ Aban and he is Aban bin Uthman].

I say: It is very unlikely that this Hakimah, the mother of Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughirah, was a young child (i.e. at the time of this incident) who was not capable of washing (the body), preparing it, carrying it or undertaking any of the necessities of burials. It is therefore most likely that she was a young mature woman of no less than twenty years of age. That is whilst an average woman can no longer bear children past approximately 45 years of age which would make the latest possible time for her to have given birth the year 60 AH or close to that. Consequently, Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al- Akhnas was most definitely born prior to 60 AH. If we were to outweigh the most likely scenario, we would say that his birth would have been around 45 AH. That is because he was of similar age to Imam Salih bin Kaisan. In addition, it is unlikely that it was before the year 45 AH because he would not then have missed Abu Hurairah. He would therefore have been older than Az-Zuhri by about 15-20 years and as such there is no wonder that Az-Zuhri related from him because he was from among the younger of his Shuyukh.

It is also apparent that the incorrect observation of Imam ‘Ali bin Al- Madini related to the small number of Hadith of the man (i.e. Uthman Al-Akhnasi) formed the basis of the view of Imam An-Nasa’i, which in any case is extreme and obstinate, concerning Uthman, when he said: [He is not strong].

- That is according to what is found recorded in “As-Sunan Al-Kubra” of An-Nasa’i (5/398/5893):

[Abu Dawud Sulaiman bin Saif Al-Harrani informed us from Abu ‘Ali (Al-Hanafi), from Ibn Abu Dh’ib, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al- Akhnasi, from Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever has been appointed over the judiciary, then it is as if he has been slaughtered without a knife”]. Then Abu Abdur Rahman said: “Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi is not strong. We only made mention so as to not remove Uthman from the middle, making it: Ibn Abu Dh’ib from Sa’id”. The statement of Imam An-Nasa’i: “He is not strong” came as a comment upon this narration, however he did not list this person (i.e. Uthman) among the weak narrators and those who are disregarded. I don’t know if he changed his opinion or disregarded him due to the small number of his narrations. That is while An-Nasa’i is known for his extremity and stubbornness, as alluded to previously. Similarly, it is also apparent that the incorrect observation of Imam ‘Ali bin Al-Madini formed the basis of the view of Imam Abu Dawud concerning Uthman: “His Hadith contains Nakarah (that which is objectionable or has a defect or fault in it)”. This is found recorded in “Masa’il Al-Imam Ahmad” by Abu Dawud As-Sijistani (404/1904):

[I heard Ahmad bin Hanbal saying: It was related from the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he said: “What is between the East and the West is a Qiblah”. And it does not have an Isnad (recorded chain of transmission), referring to the Hadith of Abdullah bin Ja’far Al- Makhrami from the father of Miswar bin Makhrama, from Uthman Al-Akhnasi, from Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him). He intended by this statement that: It does not have an Isnad (chain of transmission) due to the condition (or status) of Uthman Al-Akhnasi, because his Hadith contains Nakarah (that which is objectionable or has a defect or fault in it)].

Observe that his statement: [He intended by this statement that: It does not have an Isnad (chain of transmission) due to the condition (or status) of Uthman Al-Akhnasi, because his Hadith contains Nakarah (that which is objectionable or has a defect or fault in it)] was from the speech of Abu Dawud based on his supposition and conjecture. That is whilst supposition and conjecture do not stand up against the truth and “Zhann” (supposition and conjecture) is the most untruthful of speech. Had he asked Ahmad bin Hanbal concerning what he had intended, that would have been better but he did not do that and the matter remained one of mere possibility. That is despite the overriding preponderant view being that the Isnad that he knew which was mentioned by Abu Dawud: “Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami from the father of Miswar bin Makhrama, from Uthman Al-Akhnasi, from Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah”, was not known by Imam Ahmad. Rather, the other Isnad only reached him, which was recorded in the Sunan of Imam At-Tirmidhi, and was related by Abu Ma’shar, concerning whom there is almost a consensus stating that he is not strong (in terms of narration) and hence in the end he confused the matter greatly.

- That is as the following came recorded in the Sunan of At-Tirmidhi (1/446/342): [Muhammad bin Abu Ma’shar informed us and said: My father related to us from Muhammad bin ‘Amr, from Abu Salamah, from Abu Hurairah, who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “What is between the East and the West is a Qiblah”].

- The following came recorded in the Sunan of At-Tirmidhi (1/446/343): [Yahya bin Musa related from Muhammad bin Abu Ma’shar similar to it (i.e. the above Hadith]. Then Imam At-Tirmidhi said:

[The Hadith of Abu Hurairah has been related from him from more than one angle. Some of the people of knowledge have spoken about Abu Ma’shar from the angle of his memory (or preservation). His name is Najih the Mawla of Bani Hashim. Muhammad (Al-Bukhari) said: “I don’t narrate anything from him although people have related from him”. Muhammad (Al-Bukhari) said: “The Hadith of Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al- Akhnasi, from Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, is stronger than the Hadith of Abu Ma’shar and more authentic].

- The following came recorded in the Sunan of At-Tirmidhi (1/448/344): [Al-Hasan bin Bakr Al-Marwazi related from Al-Mu’alla bin Mansur, from Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami, from Uthman bin Muhammad Al-Akhnasi, from Sa’id Al-Maqburi, from Abu Hurairah, from the Prophet (peace be upon him), who said: “What is between the East and the West is a Qiblah”]. At-Tirmidhi then said: This is a Hasan Sahih Hadith. ‘Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Makhrami was only said because he is the son of Al-Miswar bin Makhramah. In addition, (The Hadith) “What is between the East and the West is a Qiblah” has been related by more than one of the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) including ‘Umar ibn Al—Khattab, ‘Ali bin Abu Talib and Ibn ‘Abbas. Ibn ‘Umar said: “If you made the East be on your right and the West on your left, then what lies between them is a Qiblah, when you are seeking to face the Qiblah”. Ibn ul-Mubarajk said: [“What is between the East and the West is a Qiblah” – This relates to the people of the West]. And Abdullah ibn ul-Mubarak chose leniency in the matter for the people of Merv].

Whatever the matter is, we have settled the subject of the “Nakarah” (defectiveness) of the Hadith of Uthman Al-Akhnasi above and to Allah belongs all praise and favour.

As for the family of ‘Umar bin Al-Khattab, among whom Uthman bin Muhammad bin Al-Mughira Al-Akhnasi found the document of the Sahifah of Al-Madinah, then they are without doubt ‘Abdullah bin ‘Umar, ‘Asim bin ‘Umar and their brothers, sons and women folk. All of them, by the favour of Allah are trustworthy and reliable, possessing the highest level of trust, truthfulness and God-fearing and no liar or fabricator has been known to exist among them; Allah forbid.