Mustadrak al-Hakim — Hadith 8272

(1) إسناده ضعيف، إسماعيل بن مسلم - وهو المكي - ضعيف، والحسن - وهو البصري - مدلّس وقد عنعن، وجندب الخير مختلف في نسبه وصحبته. وقال الترمذي في "العلل الكبير" بعد أن أخرجه فيه (430): سألت محمدًا (يعني البخاريَّ) عن هذا الحديث، فقال: هذا لا شيء، وإنما رواه إسماعيل بن مسلم، وضعف إسماعيلَ بن مسلم المكي جدًّا.
Grading: The chain of this narration is da'if (weak). Technical note / Defect ('illah): The narrator in it, Isma'il bin Muslim (who is al-Makki), is weak. The other narrator, al-Hasan al-Basri, although trustworthy, is a mudallis, and here he narrated with "'an" ('an'anah), which, in the absence of an explicit statement of hearing, raises the suspicion of a break in the chain. Also, there is disagreement about the lineage and Companionship of Jundab al-Khayr (may Allah be pleased with him). Reference / Source: Imam al-Tirmidhi, after citing this hadith in his book "al-'Ilal al-Kabir" (no. 430), said: I asked Muhammad (i.e., Imam al-Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him) about this hadith, and he said: "This is nothing (i.e., it has no basis)", and that only Isma'il bin Muslim narrated it; and Imam al-Bukhari declared Isma'il bin Muslim al-Makki very weak.
يحيى بن يحيى: هو النيسابوري، وأبو معاوية: هو محمد بن خازم الضرير.
Technical note / Defect ('illah): The identification of the names in the chain: Yahya bin Yahya is "Yahya bin Yahya al-Naysaburi", and Abu Mu'awiyah is "Muhammad bin Khazim al-Darir".
وأخرجه الترمذي في "جامعه" (1460) عن أحمد بن منيع، عن أبي معاوية، بهذا الإسناد. وقال: هذا حديث لا نعرفه مرفوعًا إلَّا من هذا الوجه، وإسماعيل بن مسلم المكي يُضعَّف في الحديث من قبل حفظه، ثم قال: والصحيح عن جندب موقوفًا.
Reference / Source: Imam al-Tirmidhi narrated it in his "Jami'" (Sunan al-Tirmidhi) (no. 1460) through Ahmad bin Mani', from Abu Mu'awiyah, with this same chain. Grading: Imam al-Tirmidhi says: "We do not know this hadith as marfu' (i.e., as a saying of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him) except through this route (which is weak)." Technical note / Defect ('illah): Imam al-Tirmidhi further says that Isma'il bin Muslim al-Makki is considered weak in hadith because of his poor memory. Important point: Then Imam al-Tirmidhi gave the final word: "What is correct is that this narration is mawquf on Jundab (may Allah be pleased with him) (i.e., his own saying and practice), not marfu'."
وتابع أبا معاوية عن إسماعيل بن مسلم مروانُ بن معاوية الفزاري عند الطبراني (1665).
Corroborating chains and supporting reports: In the narration of al-Tabarani (no. 1665), Marwan bin Mu'awiyah al-Fazari corroborated (mutaba'ah) Abu Mu'awiyah in narrating from Isma'il bin Muslim.
وخالفهما سفيان بن عيينة، فرواه عن إسماعيل بن مسلم عن الحسن مرسلًا عند عبد الرزاق (18752).
Details of the narration: Contrary to the two of them (Abu Mu'awiyah and Marwan), Sufyan bin Uyaynah differed: in the Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq (no. 18752) he narrated this report from Isma'il bin Muslim, from al-Hasan al-Basri, as "mursal" (without the intermediary of a Companion).
وأخرجه الطبراني في "الكبير" (1666)، وأبو نعيم في "معرفة الصحابة" (1589) من طريق خالد العبد، عن الحسن، عن جندب مرفوعًا. وفي رواية أبي نعيم قصة قتل جندب للساحر، وهذه متابعة لإسماعيل لا يفرح بها، فخالد العبد متهم بالكذب كما في "لسان الميزان".
Reference / Source: Imam al-Tabarani narrated it in "al-Mu'jam al-Kabir" (no. 1666) and Abu Nu'aym in "Ma'rifat al-Sahabah" (no. 1589) through the route of Khalid al-Abd, from al-Hasan, from Jundab (may Allah be pleased with him), as marfu'. Details of the narration: In the narration of Abu Nu'aym there is also the story of Jundab (may Allah be pleased with him) killing a sorcerer. Technical note / Defect ('illah): This narration does corroborate Isma'il bin Muslim, but it is nothing to be pleased about (i.e., it is not fit for support), because the narrator Khalid al-Abd is accused of lying (muttaham bi'l-kadhib), as mentioned in "Lisan al-Mizan".
وستأتي قصة قتل جندبٍ للساحر بعد الحديث التالي، وهي التي عناها الترمذي بقوله: والصحيح عن جندب موقوفًا.
Note / Clarification: The incident of the sorcerer being killed by Jundab (may Allah be pleased with him) comes after the next hadith, and this is the incident al-Tirmidhi was referring to when he said: "What is correct is that it is established from Jundab (may Allah be pleased with him) as mawquf."
قال الترمذي: والعمل على هذا (يعني قتل الساحر) عند بعض أهل العلم من أصحاب النبي ﷺ وغيرهم، وهو قول مالك بن أنس، وقال الشافعي: إنما يقتل الساحر إذا كان يعمل في سحره ما يبلغ به الكفر، فإذا عمل عملًا دون الكفر فلم نرَ عليه قتلًا.
General principle: Imam al-Tirmidhi says: Some of the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and other people of knowledge acted on this (i.e., that the sorcerer is to be killed), and this is also the view of Imam Malik bin Anas. Juristic disagreement: Imam al-Shafi'i, however, says: "The sorcerer is only killed when in his sorcery he does something that reaches the level of disbelief; but if he does something below disbelief, then in our view killing is not due upon him."
قال القرطبي في "تفسيره" 2/ 47: واختلف الفقهاء في حكم الساحر المسلم والذمي، فذهب مالك إلى أنَّ المسلم إذا سحر بنفسه بكلام يكون كفرًا يقتل ولا يستتاب ولا تقبل توبته، لأنه أمر يستسرّ به كالزنديق والزاني، ولأنَّ الله تعالى سمى السحر كفرًا بقوله: ﴿وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ حَتَّى يَقُولَا إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلَا تَكْفُرْ﴾، وهو قول أحمد بن حنبل وأبي ثور وإسحاق والشافعي وأبي حنيفة.
Reference / Source: Imam al-Qurtubi says in his "Tafsir" (2/47): The jurists differed on the ruling of the Muslim sorcerer and the dhimmi sorcerer. Juristic schools: The view of Imam Malik is that if a Muslim himself practises sorcery with words that amount to disbelief, he is killed; he is not asked to repent, nor is his repentance accepted (to avert the punishment), because it is a hidden crime like that of the zindiq and the adulterer. The evidence is that Allah the Exalted called sorcery disbelief, in His saying: ﴿And they (the two) did not teach anyone until they said: We are only a trial, so do not disbelieve﴾. This is also the view of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Abu Thawr, Ishaq, al-Shafi'i and Abu Hanifah (in principle, regarding sorcery being disbelief or regarding its punishment).
وروي قتل الساحر عن عمر وعثمان وابن عمر وحفصة وأبي موسى وقيس بن سعد وعن سبعة من التابعين. ثم قال: وروي عن الشافعي: لا يقتل الساحر إلَّا أن يقتل بسحره، ويقول: تعمّدت القتل، وإن قال: لم أتعمده، لم يقتل، وكانت فيه الدية كقتل الخطأ، وإن أضرَّ به أُدّب على قدر الضرر.
Corroborating chains and supporting reports: Killing the sorcerer is narrated from Umar, Uthman, Ibn Umar, Hafsah, Abu Musa al-Ash'ari and Qays bin Sa'd (may Allah be pleased with them) and from seven of the Successors. General principle: Then Imam al-Qurtubi said: It is narrated from Imam al-Shafi'i that the sorcerer is not killed unless he kills someone by his sorcery and admits: I killed deliberately. If he says: I did not intend to kill, he is not killed (in retaliation); rather it is like accidental killing, for which blood money is due. And if he only caused harm by his sorcery (without taking a life), he is disciplined (ta'zir) in proportion to the harm.
قال ابن العربي: وهذا باطل من وجهين، أحدهما: أنه لم يعلم السحر، وحقيقته أنه كلام مؤلَّف يعظَّم به غير الله تعالى، وتنسب إليه المقادير والكائنات. الثاني: أنَّ الله سبحانه قد صرح في كتابه بأنه كفر فقال: ﴿وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ﴾ بقول السحر ﴿وَلَكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا﴾ به وبتعليمه، وهاروت وماروت يقولان: ﴿إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلَا تَكْفُرْ﴾، وهذا تأكيد للبيان. واحتج أصحاب مالك بأنه لا تقبل توبته، لأنَّ السحر باطن لا يظهره صاحبه فلا تعرف توبته كالزنديق، وإنما يستتاب من أظهر الكفر مرتدًا. قال مالك: فإن جاء الساحر أو الزنديق تائبًا قبل أن يشهد عليهما قبلت توبتهما، والحجّة لذلك قوله تعالى: ﴿فَلَمْ يَكُ يَنْفَعُهُمْ إِيمَانُهُمْ لَمَّا رَأَوْا بَأْسَنَا﴾، فدَّل على أنه كان ينفعهم إيمانهم قبل نزول العذاب، فكذلك هذان.
Research point: Qadi Ibn al-Arabi (the Maliki) says: This (view, that the sorcerer's repentance is accepted or that he is not killed) is false for two reasons. First: this person did not understand what sorcery really is; its reality is that it is composed speech in which something other than Allah is venerated and the course of events in creation is attributed to it. Second: Allah, Glorified is He, stated explicitly in His Book that it is disbelief. He said: ﴿And Sulayman did not disbelieve﴾, i.e., he did not utter the words of sorcery, ﴿but the devils disbelieved﴾, i.e., through sorcery and by teaching it. And Harut and Marut also said: ﴿We are only a trial, so do not disbelieve﴾; this is an emphasis of the statement. The evidence of the Maliki school: The companions of Malik argued that the sorcerer's repentance is not accepted (in court) because sorcery is an inward (hidden) crime which its practitioner does not make apparent, so, like the zindiq, his repentance cannot be known. Repentance is only sought from an apostate who displays his disbelief openly. Imam Malik says: "However, if the sorcerer or the zindiq comes repenting of his own accord (before testimony is established against them), their repentance is accepted. The evidence for this is the saying of Allah: ﴿But their faith did not benefit them when they saw Our punishment﴾. This verse indicates that their believing before the punishment descended (or before being caught) would have benefited them, and so the ruling for these two (the sorcerer and the zindiq) is the same."
وانظر "المغني" لابن قدامة 12/ 302.
Reference / Source: For further detail see Ibn Qudamah's "al-Mughni" (vol. 12, p. 302).