Abū Khāzim ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī informed us: Al-Ṭaḥāwī informed us: I heard Abū Bakra Bakkār ibn Qutayba say: I heard Hilāl ibn Yaḥyā say: I performed the pilgrimage during Hārūn's reign, after Abū Yūsuf's death. Asad ibn ʿAmr, who held judicial office, performed the pilgrimage with Hārūn that year. I saw Hārūn performing the arrival circumambulation. He had omitted the brisk gait, and people were standing away from him. A servant behind him tugged his garment, telling him to go back and perform the brisk gait. I was at the back of the crowd and called out, “Commander of the Faithful, if you continue, it is valid.” He heard me and continued, abandoning what the servant wanted. I mentioned this to Abū Khāzim, who said: ʿUmar ibn Yaḥyā, Hilāl's brother, related to me: I witnessed all of this. When Hilāl intended to call out, I gathered my garment, put it in his mouth, and said, “By God, we left our mother only against her will. Do you want to deprive her of one of us?” By God, he could not restrain himself from calling it out. Abū Bakr continued in his report: When Hārūn finished the circumambulation and the running between the hills, he entered the Kaʿba with Asad ibn ʿAmr, his other commanders, and his cousins. It was closed behind them. I peered through a crack in the door and saw Hārūn seated and Asad ibn ʿAmr seated opposite him, while the others, Hāshimites and everyone else, stood on their feet. I realized that no one was nobler than a jurist, and a sense of Asad ibn ʿAmr's greatness entered my heart that only God knows. Then Hārūn departed with his procession. Asad mounted in the manner of judges and jurists. I followed him as he rode and asked, “Why did Abū Ḥanīfa distinguish between a breach of trust in tawliya and in murābaḥa?” By God, he did not know this statement of Abū Ḥanīfa, and he diminished in my eyes. I went to Yūsuf ibn Khālid, who was on pilgrimage that year, and told him the entire story. He said, “How would Asad know what this is? Abū Ḥanīfa distinguished between them because he treated tawliya as a transfer of a sale, since it is at the original price. It is as though the seller transfers to the new purchaser what he acquired by ownership of the item, for the original price by which he acquired it. He treated murābaḥa as a second sale, since it is at a price different from the original price.” Hilāl had a book on legal instruments and the rules of endowments, and was foremost in the science of legal instruments.

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī informed us: Al-Ṭaḥāwī informed us: I heard Abū Bakra Bakkār ibn Qutayba say: I heard Hilāl ibn Yaḥyā say: I performed the pilgrimage during Hārūn's reign, after Abū Yūsuf's death. Asad ibn ʿAmr, who held judicial office, performed the pilgrimage with Hārūn that year. I saw Hārūn performing the arrival circumambulation. He had omitted the brisk gait, and people were standing away from him. A servant behind him tugged his garment, telling him to go back and perform the brisk gait. I was at the back of the crowd and called out, “Commander of the Faithful, if you continue, it is valid.” He heard me and continued, abandoning what the servant wanted. I mentioned this to Abū Khāzim, who said: ʿUmar ibn Yaḥyā, Hilāl's brother, related to me: I witnessed all of this. When Hilāl intended to call out, I gathered my garment, put it in his mouth, and said, “By God, we left our mother only against her will. Do you want to deprive her of one of us?” By God, he could not restrain himself from calling it out. Abū Bakr continued in his report: When Hārūn finished the circumambulation and the running between the hills, he entered the Kaʿba with Asad ibn ʿAmr, his other commanders, and his cousins. It was closed behind them. I peered through a crack in the door and saw Hārūn seated and Asad ibn ʿAmr seated opposite him, while the others, Hāshimites and everyone else, stood on their feet. I realized that no one was nobler than a jurist, and a sense of Asad ibn ʿAmr's greatness entered my heart that only God knows. Then Hārūn departed with his procession. Asad mounted in the manner of judges and jurists. I followed him as he rode and asked, “Why did Abū Ḥanīfa distinguish between a breach of trust in tawliya and in murābaḥa?” By God, he did not know this statement of Abū Ḥanīfa, and he diminished in my eyes. I went to Yūsuf ibn Khālid, who was on pilgrimage that year, and told him the entire story. He said, “How would Asad know what this is? Abū Ḥanīfa distinguished between them because he treated tawliya as a transfer of a sale, since it is at the original price. It is as though the seller transfers to the new purchaser what he acquired by ownership of the item, for the original price by which he acquired it. He treated murābaḥa as a second sale, since it is at a price different from the original price.” Hilāl had a book on legal instruments and the rules of endowments, and was foremost in the science of legal instruments.

Among those later than this generation was the judge Abū Khāzim ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, originally from Basra. He learned from Bakr al-ʿAmmī and the Basran shaykhs. He was of great standing and held judicial office in Syria, Kufa, and al-Karkh in Madīnat al-Salām. ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sulaymān addressed him about selling an orphan's estate adjoining some of his estates. He wrote to him: “If the minister, may God strengthen him, sees fit, let him make me one of two men: either a man by whom judicial office is protected, or a man from whom judicial office is protected. Peace.” The jurists Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭaḥāwī and Abū Ṭāhir al-Dabbās learned from him. Abū al-Ḥasan al-Karkhī met him and attended his sessions, while being closely attached to al-Bardhaʿī.

Among those later than this generation was the judge Abū Khāzim ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, originally from Basra. He learned from Bakr al-ʿAmmī and the Basran shaykhs. He was of great standing and held judicial office in Syria, Kufa, and al-Karkh in Madīnat al-Salām. ʿUbayd Allāh ibn Sulaymān addressed him about selling an orphan's estate adjoining some of his estates. He wrote to him: “If the minister, may God strengthen him, sees fit, let him make me one of two men: either a man by whom judicial office is protected, or a man from whom judicial office is protected. Peace.” The jurists Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭaḥāwī and Abū Ṭāhir al-Dabbās learned from him. Abū al-Ḥasan al-Karkhī met him and attended his sessions, while being closely attached to al-Bardhaʿī.

After Abū Khāzim and Abū Saʿīd, teaching in Baghdad passed to Abū al-Ḥasan ʿUbayd Allāh ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Karkhī. The leadership of Abū Ḥanīfa's companions culminated in him. His students spread through the lands, held judicial office in the regions, and taught. Alongside his abundant knowledge and numerous transmissions, Abū al-Ḥasan was deeply devoted to worship, frequent in fasting and prayer, intensely scrupulous, patient with poverty and need, and averse to what was in people's hands.

After Abū Khāzim and Abū Saʿīd, teaching in Baghdad passed to Abū al-Ḥasan ʿUbayd Allāh ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Karkhī. The leadership of Abū Ḥanīfa's companions culminated in him. His students spread through the lands, held judicial office in the regions, and taught. Alongside his abundant knowledge and numerous transmissions, Abū al-Ḥasan was deeply devoted to worship, frequent in fasting and prayer, intensely scrupulous, patient with poverty and need, and averse to what was in people's hands.

Abū al-Qāsim ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAllān related to me: Abū al-Ḥasan intensely disliked those who undertook judicial office. Whenever one of his companions accepted it, he shunned him and distanced him. His companion Abū al-Qāsim ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Tanūkhī accepted judicial office. He was foremost in jurisprudence and theology, with knowledge of Arabic and strength in poetry. Abū al-Ḥasan shunned him and broke off correspondence with him. When he entered Baghdad, he could not gain admission to him. When asked on his behalf, he would say, “He used to associate with me in poverty and need. I have heard that he now spends dinars on his table every day. I never knew him to inherit property or to trade and profit. I know no explanation for this expenditure.” Shaykh Abū al-Qāsim ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Wāsiṭī told us: I remember his last visit to Baghdad. He attended gatherings and debated Ibn Abī Hurayra. What passed between them was relayed to Abū al-Ḥasan, God have mercy on him. His heart seemed to soften toward Abū al-Qāsim al-Tanūkhī. He was asked to allow him admission, and remained silent. I saw Abū al-Qāsim enter his gathering wearing his clothes and patched cloak. He bent down, kissed his head, and sat before him. He smiled at him but did not speak a word to him. Abū al-Qāsim took his leave and departed. Were we to record all the accounts we possess of Abū al-Ḥasan and Abū Khāzim, we would need a separate book; we have mentioned only what is indispensable. Abū al-Ḥasan died on the night of mid-Shaʿbān in 340. The judge Abū Tammām al-Ḥasan ibn Muḥammad al-Hāshimī al-Zaynabī, one of his companions, prayed over him. It is said that he was born in 260.

Abū al-Qāsim ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿAllān related to me: Abū al-Ḥasan intensely disliked those who undertook judicial office. Whenever one of his companions accepted it, he shunned him and distanced him. His companion Abū al-Qāsim ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Tanūkhī accepted judicial office. He was foremost in jurisprudence and theology, with knowledge of Arabic and strength in poetry. Abū al-Ḥasan shunned him and broke off correspondence with him. When he entered Baghdad, he could not gain admission to him. When asked on his behalf, he would say, “He used to associate with me in poverty and need. I have heard that he now spends dinars on his table every day. I never knew him to inherit property or to trade and profit. I know no explanation for this expenditure.” Shaykh Abū al-Qāsim ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Wāsiṭī told us: I remember his last visit to Baghdad. He attended gatherings and debated Ibn Abī Hurayra. What passed between them was relayed to Abū al-Ḥasan, God have mercy on him. His heart seemed to soften toward Abū al-Qāsim al-Tanūkhī. He was asked to allow him admission, and remained silent. I saw Abū al-Qāsim enter his gathering wearing his clothes, trembling. He bent down, kissed his head, and sat before him. He smiled at him but did not speak a word to him. Abū al-Qāsim took his leave and departed. Were we to record all the accounts we possess of Abū al-Ḥasan and Abū Khāzim, we would need a separate book; we have mentioned only what is indispensable. Abū al-Ḥasan died on the night of mid-Shaʿbān in 340. The judge Abū Tammām al-Ḥasan ibn Muḥammad al-Hāshimī al-Zaynabī, one of his companions, prayed over him. It is said that he was born in 260.

Among his contemporaries was Abū Ṭāhir Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn Sufyān. Most of his learning was from Judge Abū Khāzim. He was described as having strong retention and knowledge of transmissions, but as being miserly and withholding with his learning. He held judicial office in Syria, travelled there, and died there.

Among his contemporaries was Abū Ṭāhir Muḥammad ibn Muḥammad ibn Sufyān. Most of his learning was from Judge Abū Khāzim. He was described as having strong retention and knowledge of transmissions, but as being miserly and withholding with his learning. He held judicial office in Syria, travelled there, and died there.

Of this generation—indeed, preceding them in birth and age—was Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭaḥāwī, Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Salama al-Ṭaḥāwī. He lived in Egypt, where the leadership of Abū Ḥanīfa's companions culminated in him. He learned from Abū Jaʿfar ibn Abī ʿImrān, Judge Abū Khāzim, and a group of others. At the beginning of his legal studies he studied according to al-Shāfiʿī's doctrine. Shaykh Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī related to me: The cause of his move to our companions' doctrines was that Abū Ibrāhīm al-Muzanī said to him one day, “By God, nothing will come of you.” Abū Jaʿfar was angered and felt affronted, and moved to Abū Jaʿfar ibn Abī ʿImrān. The first of his books that he composed was his abridgment, arranged according to al-Muzanī's book. When he finished it, he said, “God have mercy on Abū Ibrāhīm; if he were alive, he would make expiation for his oath.” Abū Jaʿfar had distinguished books, such as Ikhtilāf al-ʿUlamāʾ—no one produced its like—his large book on legal instruments, his book on the Qurʾan's rulings, his commentary on the meanings of transmitted reports, and other distinguished books. He died in 321 and was born in 238.

Of this generation—indeed, preceding them in birth and age—was Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭaḥāwī, Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Salama al-Ṭaḥāwī. He lived in Egypt, where the leadership of Abū Ḥanīfa's companions culminated in him. He learned from Abū Jaʿfar ibn Abī ʿImrān, Judge Abū Khāzim, and a group of others. At the beginning of his legal studies he studied according to al-Shāfiʿī's doctrine. Shaykh Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khwārizmī related to me: The cause of his move to our companions' doctrines was that Abū Ibrāhīm al-Muzanī said to him one day, “By God, nothing will come of you.” Abū Jaʿfar was angered and felt affronted, and moved to Abū Jaʿfar ibn Abī ʿImrān. The first of his books that he composed was his abridgment, arranged according to al-Muzanī's book. When he finished it, he said, “God have mercy on Abū Ibrāhīm; if he were alive, he would make expiation for his oath.” Abū Jaʿfar had distinguished books, such as Ikhtilāf al-ʿUlamāʾ—no one produced its like—his large book on legal instruments, his book on the Qurʾan's rulings, his commentary on the meanings of transmitted reports, and other distinguished books. He died in 321 and was born in 238.

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad al-Asadī informed us: The jurist Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī related to us: Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭaḥāwī related to us: Ibn Abī ʿImrān related to me: Muḥammad ibn Shujāʿ related to us: I heard al-Ḥasan ibn Abī Mālik say: Abū Yūsuf used to use analogies for his companions. Of Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan he said, “What a sword he is, but for its rust and its need for polishing!” Of al-Ḥasan al-Luʾluʾī he said, “To me he is like a pharmacist: if a man asks for something to bind his bowels, he gives him a laxative; if he asks for a laxative, he gives him something to bind them.” Of al-Marīsī he said, “To me he is like a darner’s needle: its point is fine, its eye narrow, and it breaks easily.” Of Ibrāhīm ibn al-Jarrāḥ he said, “To me he is like a man with dirhams coated in kohl: whenever he touches them, they diminish.” I mentioned this to Abū Khāzim, who said: Al-Ḥasan ibn Mūsā, judge of Hamadan, related to me from Bishr ibn al-Walīd: I heard Abū Yūsuf say all of this, adding: Of al-Ḥasan ibn Abī Mālik he said, “To me he is like a camel carrying a heavy load on a rainy day: its foreleg goes this way once and that way another time, but it comes through safely.”

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad al-Asadī informed us: The jurist Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī related to us: Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭaḥāwī related to us: Ibn Abī ʿImrān related to me: Muḥammad ibn Shujāʿ related to us: I heard al-Ḥasan ibn Abī Mālik say: Abū Yūsuf used to use analogies for his companions. Of Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan he said, “What a sword he is, but for its rust and its need for polishing!” Of al-Ḥasan al-Luʾluʾī he said, “To me he is like a pharmacist: if a man asks for something to bind his bowels, he gives him a laxative; if he asks for a laxative, he gives him something to bind them.” Of al-Marīsī he said, “To me he is like a darner’s needle: its point is fine, its eye narrow, and it breaks easily.” Of Ibrāhīm ibn al-Jarrāḥ he said, “To me he is like a man with dirhams coated in kohl: whenever he touches them, they diminish.” I mentioned this to Abū Khāzim, who said: Al-Ḥasan ibn Mūsā, judge of Hamadan, related to me from Bishr ibn al-Walīd: I heard Abū Yūsuf say all of this, adding: Of al-Ḥasan ibn Abī Mālik he said, “To me he is like a camel carrying a heavy load on a rainy day: its foreleg goes this way once and that way another time, but it comes through safely.”

ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm the Qurʾān reciter informed us: the judge Abū Bakr Makram narrated to us: Aḥmad ibn ʿUbayd Allāh al-Thaqafī narrated to us: Abū Khāzim ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz narrated to us: Bakr ibn Khalaf al-ʿAmmī narrated to me: Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa narrated to me: Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan the jurist narrated to me. Abū Khāzim said: He was a client of Banū Shaybān; they originally came from a village between Palestine and Ramla, which I know, and I know some of its inhabitants. They then moved to Kufa. He said: When al-Rashīd summoned me to appoint me judge in Syria, I arrived in the City of Peace and met Abū Yūsuf. He was the one who had named and recommended me. I told him, “Because of my claim upon you, my constant attendance on you, and my taking you as teacher and imam, you should obtain my exemption from this office.” He said, “I will ride with you to Yaḥyā ibn Khālid and speak to him.” He rode with me to Yaḥyā ibn Khālid. When we entered, Yaḥyā moved aside on his prayer mat for him, and he sat with him on it; I sat at the doorway. I heard him say, “This is Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan; his circumstances are such and such,” describing me and mentioning my refusal. Yaḥyā asked him, “What is your opinion of him?” He said, “I say that if you exempt him, you will not find his equal.” When Yaḥyā heard this, he paid no attention to what I said and confirmed my appointment. When al-Rashīd arrived at Raqqa, I was summoned. I entered his presence with al-Ḥasan ibn Ziyād al-Luʾluʾī and Abū al-Bukhtarī Wahb ibn Wahb. He brought out the safe-conduct written for Yaḥyā ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Ḥasan and handed it to me. I read it, knowing why we had been summoned. I weighed whether to reveal anything he could use to obtain a means of killing the man, or refrain from challenging it despite knowing the anger of al-Rashīd I would incur. I preferred God’s command and the Hereafter, and said, “This is an emphatic safe-conduct; there is no way to invalidate it.” He snatched the document from my hand and passed it to al-Luʾluʾī. He read it and said faintly—I do not know whether he was heard—“This is a safe-conduct.” It was snatched from his hand and passed to Abū al-Bukhtarī, who read it and then said, “I place no hope in it and do not approve it. This is an evil man who has broken communal unity, shed Muslim blood, and done such and such; he has no safe-conduct.” He then reached into his leather boot while I watched, drew out a knife, cut the document in two, and handed it to the servant. Turning to al-Rashīd, he said, “Kill him; responsibility for his blood rests on my neck.” We rose from the gathering. Al-Rashīd’s messenger came to prohibit me from giving anyone a legal opinion or judging. I remained in that condition until Umm Jaʿfar wanted to establish an endowment and sent to me about it. I explained that I had been forbidden to give legal opinions. She spoke to al-Rashīd, and he permitted me. Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan said: Everyone in al-Rashīd’s household and I were astonished at Abū al-Bukhtarī: he was a judge, yet issued this ruling and took responsibility for a Muslim’s blood; and then there was his carrying a knife in his boot. He said: Al-Rashīd did not kill Yaḥyā then; rather, he died in prison after some time. Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa said in his account: Al-Rashīd later brought Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan close, advanced him, appointed him chief judge, and took him to Rayy. He and al-Kisāʾī died there on the same day. Al-Rashīd said, “I have buried jurisprudence and grammar in Rayy.” Bakr al-ʿAmmī said in his account: When Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan ruled that the safe-conduct was valid, while Abū al-Bukhtarī ruled it void and permitted his blood to be shed, Yaḥyā said, “Commander of the Faithful, Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan, with his standing in jurisprudence, rules my safe-conduct valid, while this man rules it void. What does this man have to do with giving legal opinions? His father was only a drummer in Medina.”

ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm the Qurʾān reciter informed us: the judge Abū Bakr Makram narrated to us: Aḥmad ibn ʿUbayd Allāh al-Thaqafī narrated to us: Abū Khāzim ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz narrated to us: Bakr ibn Khalaf al-ʿAmmī narrated to me: Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa narrated to me: Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan the jurist narrated to me. Abū Khāzim said: He was a client of Banū Shaybān; they originally came from a village between Palestine and Ramla, which I know, and I know some of its inhabitants. They then moved to Kufa. He said: When al-Rashīd summoned me to appoint me judge in Syria, I arrived in the City of Peace and met Abū Yūsuf. He was the one who had named and recommended me. I told him, “Because of my claim upon you, my constant attendance on you, and my taking you as teacher and imam, you should guide me in this affair.” He said, “I will ride with you to Yaḥyā ibn Khālid and speak to him.” He rode with me to Yaḥyā ibn Khālid. When we entered, Yaḥyā moved aside on his prayer mat for him, and he sat with him on it; I sat at the doorway. I heard him say, “This is Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan; his circumstances are such and such,” describing me and mentioning my refusal. Yaḥyā asked him, “What is your opinion of him?” He said, “I say that if you exempt him, you will not find his equal.” When Yaḥyā heard this, he paid no attention to what I said and confirmed my appointment. When al-Rashīd arrived at Raqqa, I was summoned. I entered his presence with al-Ḥasan ibn Ziyād al-Luʾluʾī and Abū al-Bukhtarī Wahb ibn Wahb. He brought out the safe-conduct written for Yaḥyā ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Ḥasan and handed it to me. I read it, knowing why we had been summoned. I weighed whether to reveal anything he could use to obtain a means of killing the man, or refrain from challenging it despite knowing the anger of al-Rashīd I would incur. I preferred God’s command and the Hereafter, and said, “This is an emphatic safe-conduct; there is no way to invalidate it.” He snatched the document from my hand and passed it to al-Luʾluʾī. He read it and said faintly—I do not know whether he was heard—“This is a safe-conduct.” It was snatched from his hand and passed to Abū al-Bukhtarī, who read it and then said, “I do not uphold it and do not approve it. This is an evil man who has broken communal unity, shed Muslim blood, and done such and such; he has no safe-conduct.” He then reached into his leather boot while I watched, drew out a knife, cut the document in two, and handed it to the servant. Turning to al-Rashīd, he said, “Kill him; responsibility for his blood rests on my neck.” We rose from the gathering. Al-Rashīd’s messenger came to prohibit me from giving anyone a legal opinion or judging. I remained in that condition until Umm Jaʿfar wanted to establish an endowment and sent to me about it. I explained that I had been forbidden to give legal opinions. She spoke to al-Rashīd, and he permitted me. Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan said: Everyone in al-Rashīd’s household and I were astonished at Abū al-Bukhtarī: he was a judge, yet issued this ruling and took responsibility for a Muslim’s blood; and then there was his carrying a knife in his boot. He said: Al-Rashīd did not kill Yaḥyā then; rather, he died in prison after some time. Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa said in his account: Al-Rashīd later brought Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan close, advanced him, appointed him chief judge, and took him to Rayy. He and al-Kisāʾī died there on the same day. Al-Rashīd said, “I have buried jurisprudence and grammar in Rayy.” Bakr al-ʿAmmī said in his account: When Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan ruled that the safe-conduct was valid, while Abū al-Bukhtarī ruled it void and permitted his blood to be shed, Yaḥyā said, “Commander of the Faithful, Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan, with his standing in jurisprudence, rules my safe-conduct valid, while this man rules it void. What does this man have to do with giving legal opinions? His father was only a drummer in Medina.”

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī the jurist informed us: al-Ṭaḥāwī narrated to us: I heard the judge Abū Khāzim say, “I have never seen younger men of Baghdad more intelligent than ʿĪsā ibn Abān and Bishr ibn al-Walīd.” Abū Khāzim said: ʿĪsā was exceptionally generous and used to say, “By God, if a man were brought to me who treated his property as I treat mine, I would place him under financial guardianship.” A man brought Muḥammad ibn ʿAbbād al-Muhallabī before him, claiming four hundred dinars. ʿĪsā asked him about the claim, and he acknowledged it. The man said, “Imprison him for me.” ʿĪsā replied, “You are entitled to his imprisonment, but I do not think I should imprison Abū ʿAbd Allāh when I can redeem him with my own property.” ʿĪsā paid it on his behalf from his own property.

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī the jurist informed us: al-Ṭaḥāwī narrated to us: I heard the judge Abū Khāzim say, “I have never seen younger men of Baghdad more intelligent than ʿĪsā ibn Abān and Bishr ibn al-Walīd.” Abū Khāzim said: ʿĪsā was exceptionally generous and used to say, “By God, if a man were brought to me who treated his property as I treat mine, I would place him under financial guardianship.” A man brought Muḥammad ibn ʿAbbād al-Muhallabī before him, claiming four hundred dinars. ʿĪsā asked him about the claim, and he acknowledged it. The man said, “Imprison him for me.” ʿĪsā replied, “You are entitled to his imprisonment, but I do not think I should imprison Abū ʿAbd Allāh when I can redeem him with my own property.” ʿĪsā paid it on his behalf from his own property.

The judge ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: the learned jurist Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī narrated to us: al-Ṭaḥāwī informed us: I heard Bakkār ibn Qutayba say: A man appeared in a lawsuit before ʿĪsā ibn Abān, who was serving as our judge in Basra. He ordered that the man be struck on the back of his neck, and this was done. The man claimed he had lost his sight and went to al-Muʿtaṣim to complain against him. Al-Muʿtaṣim asked, “To whom in Basra would you like us to write for you?” He replied, “To ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿĀʾisha al-Taymī.” He ordered a letter to him to investigate between the man and ʿĪsā. Upon returning, the man delivered it to Ibn ʿĀʾisha, who sent to inform ʿĪsā. ʿĪsā promised to attend the great mosque for the investigation. Ibn ʿĀʾisha arrived first and sat by a column. Then ʿĪsā came; I was with him that day, along with his officers and companions. Because of the crowd, he could not enter through any of the mosque’s doors, so he entered, and we with him, by the way the callers to prayer used on Fridays. ʿĪsā went to the judicial column where he, and judges before him, sat to judge, and sat there. Ibn ʿĀʾisha expected him to come over. When Ibn ʿĀʾisha had informed him of the letter, ʿĪsā had replied that he would attend only after the governor and the postal official were present. Both came. After a long wait, Ibn ʿĀʾisha sent to ʿĪsā: “The man”—meaning the litigant—“has arrived, and we are waiting for you.” ʿĪsā sent back: “I have not been dismissed from office; the office remains mine as before. The column where I am is the column known as the place where judges sit. If any of the judges’ duties has been entrusted to you, your seat should be there.” When Ibn ʿĀʾisha heard this, he realized he had erred, but was too proud to rise from where he sat and go to ʿĪsā’s place. I saw him inching along, keeping himself hidden from us, until he reached the place where ʿĪsā sat. The litigant presented his claim before them all. Ibn ʿĀʾisha asked ʿĪsā, “What do you say about what this man has mentioned?” ʿĪsā replied, “I will not say a word unless the governor’s scribe, the postal official’s scribe, and my scribe write it down.” Then ʿĪsā gave his statement, they all recorded it, and the letter was sent. The outcome was nothing like what Ibn ʿĀʾisha or the litigant had anticipated; the affair turned out as ʿĪsā wished. I mentioned this to the judge Abū Khāzim. He knew of it, affirmed Bakkār’s entire account, and also told me: A physician in Basra, whose judgment was relied upon and whose account was not suspected, told me he was at Ibn ʿĀʾisha’s house after the dispatch of his letter concerning this affair. He said, “While I was in its courtyard, I saw a sheet and picked it up. It contained a copy of what Ibn ʿĀʾisha had prepared and written to al-Muʿtaṣim. I found many additions to it that had not occurred between him and ʿĪsā.” Returning to Bakkār’s account: Afterward, some Hāshimīs sued Ibn ʿĀʾisha concerning income he took from their endowment. His mother was one of them, and he took it through her, since the endowment was for them, their children, and their children’s children. They said, “You are a man of Banū Taym. You have no right to take from our endowment, which is for us and our children, for we are of Banū Hāshim.” They sued him before ʿĪsā ibn Abān. ʿĪsā asked him for his grounds for taking what he did from their endowment. He said, “I take through my mother. The founder is the ancestor to whom they trace themselves through their fathers, and he is my maternal ancestor; I trace myself to him through her, as they do through their fathers.” ʿĪsā said, “I do not see a right for you in this. It is for the founder’s descendants who trace themselves to him through their fathers, not their mothers.” Ibn ʿĀʾisha said, “I have been receiving it under several judges,” naming Ismāʿīl ibn Ḥammād, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Anṣārī, and Yaḥyā ibn Aktham. ʿĪsā said, “If any of the judges you named actually ruled to that effect, and you have documentary evidence of one of their judgments, I shall enforce it for you and count you among the beneficiaries. If you do not, their officers merely exceeded their authority by paying you what they did from its income. Were they sued before me over that, I would make them liable for it.” He excluded him from the endowment and restored it to the Hāshimīs alone; this became a cause of his poverty. Bakkār said: Our companions, Hilāl and others, said that in giving this judgment ʿĪsā had departed from his companions’ position, for they regarded daughters’ children in this matter like sons’ children. They said he was driven to it by what Ibn ʿĀʾisha had done in the story we began with. This was mentioned to ʿĪsā, who said, “I have not departed from our companions’ position. The position on which I judged is Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan’s.” Bakkār said: Neither we, Hilāl, nor those jurists who objected knew this to be Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan’s position. I mentioned it to Abū Khāzim, who knew it and said, “They have achieved nothing. ʿĪsā has transmitted this truthfully from Muḥammad. It is in his large Book of International Law: when a person from an enemy territory is granted safe-conduct for himself, his children, and his children’s children, his daughters’ children are not included.” I returned to the Book of International Law and found it as Abū Khāzim had said. Al-Ṭaḥāwī said: Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Baṣrī al-Sājī, one of the prominent Basrans who came to us and an accomplished specialist in inheritance shares, told me: After his affair with ʿĪsā, Ibn ʿĀʾisha went to the court and stayed there for some time. There the Baghdadis heard from him what they heard. Then he returned to Basra. Abū Khāzim said: When Ibn ʿĀʾisha wanted to return to Basra, Ibn Abī Duʾād asked him at their farewell, “Is there any need, Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, that we can fulfill?” He replied, “Yes: appointment to the judgeship of Basra.” Ibn Abī Duʾād replied, “By God, there is no way to dismiss Abū Mūsā, but ask for something else.” He asked for nothing.

The judge ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: the learned jurist Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī narrated to us: al-Ṭaḥāwī informed us: I heard Bakkār ibn Qutayba say: A man appeared in a lawsuit before ʿĪsā ibn Abān, who was serving as our judge in Basra. He ordered that the man be struck on the back of his neck, and this was done. The man claimed he had lost his sight and went to al-Muʿtaṣim to complain against him. Al-Muʿtaṣim asked, “To whom in Basra would you like us to write for you?” He replied, “To ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿĀʾisha al-Taymī.” He ordered a letter to him to investigate between the man and ʿĪsā. Upon returning, the man delivered it to Ibn ʿĀʾisha, who sent to inform ʿĪsā. ʿĪsā promised to attend the great mosque for the investigation. Ibn ʿĀʾisha arrived first and sat by a column. Then ʿĪsā came; I was with him that day, along with his officers and companions. Because of the crowd, he could not enter through any of the mosque’s doors, so he entered, and we with him, by the way the callers to prayer used on Fridays. ʿĪsā went to the judicial column where he, and judges before him, sat to judge, and sat there. Ibn ʿĀʾisha expected him to come over. When Ibn ʿĀʾisha had informed him of the letter, ʿĪsā had replied that he would attend only after the governor and the postal official were present. Both came. After a long wait, Ibn ʿĀʾisha sent to ʿĪsā: “The man”—meaning the litigant—“has arrived, and we are waiting for you.” ʿĪsā sent back: “I have not been dismissed from office; the office remains mine as before. The column where I am is the column known as the place where judges sit. If any of the judges’ duties has been entrusted to you, your seat should be there.” When Ibn ʿĀʾisha heard this, he realized he had erred, but was too proud to rise from where he sat and go to ʿĪsā’s place. I saw him inching past several columns, until he reached the place where ʿĪsā sat. The governor and the postal official were with ʿĪsā where he sat. The claimant presented his claim before them all. Ibn ʿĀʾisha asked ʿĪsā, “What do you say about what this man has mentioned?” ʿĪsā replied, “I will not say a word unless the governor’s scribe, the postal official’s scribe, and my scribe write it down.” Then ʿĪsā gave his statement, they all recorded it, and the letter was sent. The outcome was nothing like what Ibn ʿĀʾisha or the litigant had anticipated; the affair turned out as ʿĪsā wished. I mentioned this to the judge Abū Khāzim. He knew of it, affirmed Bakkār’s entire account, and also told me: A physician in Basra, whose judgment was relied upon and whose account was not suspected, told me he was at Ibn ʿĀʾisha’s house after the dispatch of his letter concerning this affair. He said, “While I was in its courtyard, I saw a sheet and picked it up. It contained a copy of what Ibn ʿĀʾisha had prepared and written to al-Muʿtaṣim. I found many additions to it that had not occurred between him and ʿĪsā.” Returning to Bakkār’s account: Afterward, some Hāshimīs sued Ibn ʿĀʾisha concerning income he took from their endowment. His mother was one of them, and he took it through her, since the endowment was for them, their children, and their children’s children. They said, “You are a man of Banū Taym. You have no right to take from our endowment, which is for us and our children, for we are of Banū Hāshim.” They sued him before ʿĪsā ibn Abān. ʿĪsā asked him for his grounds for taking what he did from their endowment. He said, “I take through my mother. The founder is the ancestor to whom they trace themselves through their fathers, and he is my maternal ancestor; I trace myself to him through her, as they do through their fathers.” ʿĪsā said, “I do not see a right for you in this. It is for the founder’s descendants who trace themselves to him through their fathers, not their mothers.” Ibn ʿĀʾisha said, “I have been receiving it under several judges,” naming Ismāʿīl ibn Ḥammād, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Anṣārī, and Yaḥyā ibn Aktham. ʿĪsā said, “If any of the judges you named actually ruled to that effect, and you have documentary evidence of one of their judgments, I shall enforce it for you and count you among the beneficiaries. If you do not, their officers merely exceeded their authority by paying you what they did from its income. Were they sued before me over that, I would make them liable for it.” He excluded him from the endowment and restored it to the Hāshimīs alone; this became a cause of his poverty. Bakkār said: Our companions, Hilāl and others, said that in giving this judgment ʿĪsā had departed from his companions’ position, for they regarded daughters’ children in this matter like sons’ children on an equal basis. They said he was driven to it by what Ibn ʿĀʾisha had done in the story we began with. This was mentioned to ʿĪsā, who said, “I have not departed from our companions’ position. The position on which I judged is Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan’s.” Bakkār said: Neither we, Hilāl, nor those jurists who objected knew this to be Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan’s position. I mentioned it to Abū Khāzim, who knew it and said, “They have achieved nothing. ʿĪsā has transmitted this truthfully from Muḥammad. It is in his large Book of International Law: when a person from an enemy territory is granted safe-conduct for himself, his children, and his children’s children, his daughters’ children are not included.” I returned to the Book of International Law and found it as Abū Khāzim had said. Al-Ṭaḥāwī said: Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Baṣrī al-Sājī, one of the prominent Basrans who came to us and an accomplished specialist in inheritance shares, told me: After his affair with ʿĪsā, Ibn ʿĀʾisha went to the court and stayed there for some time. There the Baghdadis heard from him what they heard. Then he returned to Basra. Abū Khāzim said: When Ibn ʿĀʾisha wanted to return to Basra, Ibn Abī Duʾād asked him at their farewell, “Is there any need, Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, that we can fulfill?” He replied, “Yes: appointment to the judgeship of Basra.” Ibn Abī Duʾād replied, “By God, there is no way to dismiss Abū Mūsā, but ask for something else.” He asked for nothing.

Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Marzubānī informed us: ʿAbd al-Wāḥid ibn Muḥammad al-Khusaynī related to me: Abū Khāzim the judge related: A man appointed over Kufa by Abū Jaʿfar al-Manṣūr wished to harm Abū Ḥanīfa, saying: “By God, I shall ask him a question that causes his death.” He summoned him publicly and said: “The Commander of the Faithful orders me to behead people, shed blood, seize property, and violate sanctities. Should I obey or disobey?” Abū Ḥanīfa asked: “What the Commander of the Faithful commands you: is it obedience to God or disobedience?” He said: “Rather, obedience to God.” He replied: “Obey the Commander of the Faithful, may God honour him, in everything that obeys God, and do not disobey him.” He left. His companions were at the door, and he told them: “The man wished to entrap us, so we entrapped him. When a difficult question comes, make its answer come from the question itself.”

Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Marzubānī informed us: ʿAbd al-Wāḥid ibn Muḥammad al-Khuṣaybī related to me: Abū Khāzim the judge related: A man appointed over Kufa by Abū Jaʿfar al-Manṣūr wished to harm Abū Ḥanīfa, saying: “By God, I shall ask him a question that causes his death.” He summoned him publicly and said: “The Commander of the Faithful orders me to behead people, shed blood, seize property, and violate sanctities. Should I obey or disobey?” Abū Ḥanīfa asked: “What the Commander of the Faithful commands you: is it obedience to God or disobedience?” He said: “Rather, obedience to God.” He replied: “Obey the Commander of the Faithful, may God honour him, in everything that obeys God, and do not disobey him.” He left. His companions were at the door, and he told them: “The man wished to entrap us, so we entrapped him. When a difficult question comes, make its answer come from the question itself.”

Abū ʿUbayd Allāh Muḥammad ibn ʿImrān ibn Mūsā al-Marzubānī informed us: The judge Makram ibn Aḥmad related: Abū Khāzim the judge related: Shuʿayb ibn Ayyūb al-Ṣarīfīnī related: al-Ḥasan ibn Ziyād related: I heard Abū Ḥanīfa say: I was with Muḥārib ibn Dithār when two litigants approached. One claimed against the other, and two witnesses testified. The defendant turned to Muḥārib and said of one witness: “By God, he is a righteous man; he is such-and-such.” Muḥārib asked: “Do you praise him although he testified against you?” He replied: “By God, he committed no fault before this.” Muḥārib ibn Dithār said: “Ibn ʿUmar related to me that God’s Messenger, peace and blessings upon him, said: ‘Birds let their beaks hang and flutter their wings on Resurrection Day from the terror they see.’ God’s Messenger also said: ‘The false witness’s feet do not move before he takes his seat in the Fire.’” The witnesses then withdrew their testimony.

Abū ʿUbayd Allāh Muḥammad ibn ʿImrān ibn Mūsā al-Marzubānī informed us: The judge Makram ibn Aḥmad related: Abū Khāzim the judge related: Shuʿayb ibn Ayyūb al-Ṣarīfīnī related: al-Ḥasan ibn Ziyād related: I heard Abū Ḥanīfa say: I was with Muḥārib ibn Dithār when two litigants approached. One claimed against the other, and two witnesses testified. The defendant turned to Muḥārib and said of one witness: “By God, he is a righteous man; he is such-and-such.” Muḥārib asked: “Do you praise him although he testified against you?” He replied: “By God, he committed no fault before this.” Muḥārib ibn Dithār said: “Ibn ʿUmar—may God be pleased with them both—related to me that God’s Messenger, peace and blessings upon him, said: ‘Birds let their beaks hang and flutter their wings on Resurrection Day from the terror they see.’ God’s Messenger also said: ‘The false witness’s feet do not move before he takes his seat in the Fire.’” The witnesses then withdrew their testimony.

Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Ṣayrafī informed us: ʿAlī ibn ʿAmr al-Ḥarīrī related to us: ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Nakhaʿī related to us: Abū Khāzim ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz related to us, from Bakr al-ʿAmmī, from Hilāl ibn Yaḥyā: Abū Yūsuf retained Qurʾanic interpretation, accounts of military campaigns, and the historical battles of the Arabs; jurisprudence was the least of his branches of knowledge.

Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Ṣayrafī informed us: ʿAlī ibn ʿAmr al-Ḥarīrī related to us: ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Nakhaʿī related to us: Abū Khāzim ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz related to us, from Bakr al-ʿAmmī, from Hilāl ibn Yaḥyā: Abū Yūsuf retained Qurʾanic interpretation, accounts of military campaigns, and the historical battles of the Arabs; jurisprudence was the least of his branches of knowledge.

Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Ṣayrafī informed us: ʿAlī ibn ʿAmr al-Ḥarīrī related to us: ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Nakhaʿī related to us: Judge Abū Khāzim related to us: Bakr al-ʿAmmī related to us, from Hilāl ibn Yaḥyā: Zufar followed Dāwūd al-Ṭāʾī, such that if Dāwūd sat on a rubbish heap, Zufar came and sat with him on it. Zufar came to Basra only to visit Dāwūd al-Ṭāʾī; God have mercy on both.

Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Ṣayrafī informed us: ʿAlī ibn ʿAmr al-Ḥarīrī related to us: ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Nakhaʿī related to us: Judge Abū Khāzim related to us: Bakr al-ʿAmmī related to us, from Hilāl ibn Yaḥyā: Zufar followed Dāwūd al-Ṭāʾī, such that if Dāwūd sat on a rubbish heap, Zufar came and sat with him on it. Zufar came to Basra only to visit Dāwūd al-Ṭāʾī; God have mercy on both.

Abū al-Ḥasan al-ʿAbbās ibn Aḥmad ibn al-Faḍl al-Hāshimī related to us: Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Miskī related to us: ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Nakhaʿī related to us: Judge Abū Khāzim related to us, from Bakr, from Hilāl ibn Abī Yaḥyā: Yūsuf ibn Khālid al-Samtī travelled from Basra to Kufa and studied jurisprudence with Abū Ḥanīfa. When he wanted to return to Basra, Abū Ḥanīfa told him, “When you arrive in Basra, you will come to people with established leadership. Do not hasten to sit at a pillar, form a study circle, and say, ‘Abū Ḥanīfa said, Abū Ḥanīfa said.’ If you do, you will soon be made to leave.” Yūsuf departed, became pleased with himself, sat at a pillar, and said, “Abū Ḥanīfa said.” They expelled him from the mosque. No one mentioned Abū Ḥanīfa until Zufar came to Basra. He sat with the elders whose leadership was established, supporting their opinions with arguments they did not possess, which impressed them. Then he said, “There is another opinion here, better than this,” and stated it and argued for it without its being known that it was Abū Ḥanīfa’s. Once they approved of it, he said, “It is Abū Ḥanīfa’s opinion.” They replied, “It is a good opinion; we do not care who held it.” He continued until he brought them to Abū Ḥanīfa’s opinion.

Abū al-Ḥasan al-ʿAbbās ibn Aḥmad ibn al-Faḍl al-Hāshimī related to us: Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad al-Miskī related to us: ʿAlī ibn Muḥammad al-Nakhaʿī related to us: Judge Abū Khāzim related to us, from Bakr, from Hilāl ibn Yaḥyā: Yūsuf ibn Khālid al-Samtī travelled from Basra to Kufa and studied jurisprudence with Abū Ḥanīfa. When he wanted to return to Basra, Abū Ḥanīfa told him, “When you arrive in Basra, you will come to people with established leadership. Do not hasten to sit at a pillar, form a study circle, and say, ‘Abū Ḥanīfa said, Abū Ḥanīfa said.’ If you do, you will soon be made to leave.” Yūsuf departed, became pleased with himself, sat at a pillar, and said, “Abū Ḥanīfa said.” They expelled him from the mosque. No one mentioned Abū Ḥanīfa until Zufar came to Basra. He sat with the elders whose leadership was established, supporting their opinions with arguments they did not possess, which impressed them. Then he said, “There is another opinion here, better than this,” and stated it and argued for it without its being known that it was Abū Ḥanīfa’s. Once they approved of it, he said, “It is Abū Ḥanīfa’s opinion.” They replied, “It is a good opinion; we do not care who held it.” He continued until he brought them to Abū Ḥanīfa’s opinion.

ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm informed us: Makram informed us: Judge Abū Khāzim related to us: Ibn Abī ʿImrān related to us: Zufar was of the Banū al-ʿAnbar, from a noble household among them. His mother was an enslaved woman, so his face resembled non-Arab faces because of her, while his speech resembled Arab speech. He attended al-Ḥajjāj ibn Arṭāʾa’s gathering. Al-Ḥajjāj held judicial office in Kufa and was prone to foul speech; the Nakhaʿ cast aspersions on his lineage. Zufar spoke and commanded the gathering, filling al-Ḥajjāj’s heart [with disquiet, implicitly]. He turned to him and said, “As for the tongue, it is Arab; as for the face, it is not an Arab face.” Zufar replied, “As for me, my people have accepted me.”

ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm informed us: Makram informed us: Judge Abū Khāzim related to us: Ibn Abī ʿImrān related to us: Zufar was of the Banū al-ʿAnbar, from a noble household among them. His mother was an enslaved woman, so his face resembled non-Arab faces because of her, while his speech resembled Arab speech. He attended al-Ḥajjāj ibn Arṭāʾa’s gathering. Al-Ḥajjāj held judicial office in Kufa and was prone to self-conceit; the Nakhaʿ cast aspersions on his lineage. Zufar spoke and commanded the gathering, filling al-Ḥajjāj’s heart [with disquiet, implicitly]. He turned to him and said, “As for the tongue, it is Arab; as for the face, it is not an Arab face.” Zufar replied, “As for me, my people have accepted me.”

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad al-Ḥulwānī informed us: Makram narrated to us: Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Salām narrated to us, from the judge Abū Khāzim, who said: I heard Bakr al-ʿAmmī say: Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa and ʿĪsā ibn Abān learned their fine manner of prayer from Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan, may God be pleased with him.

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad al-Ḥulwānī informed us: Makram narrated to us: Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Salām narrated to us, from the judge Abū Khāzim, who said: I heard Bakr al-ʿAmmī say: Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa and ʿĪsā ibn Abān learned their fine manner of prayer from Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan, may God have mercy on him.

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī the jurist informed us: al-Ṭaḥāwī informed us: Abū Khāzim narrated to us: ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Nāʾil narrated to us, saying: ʿĪsā ibn Hārūn al-Hāshimī was al-Maʾmūn’s contemporary and had heard hadith with him and al-Amīn when Hārūn summoned people from different lands so the two could hear from them. This ʿĪsā ibn Hārūn collected enough hadiths to fill a book, placed it before al-Maʾmūn, and said, “May God set the Commander of the Faithful right! These are hadiths I heard with you from the teachers al-Rashīd chose for you. Now those who frequent your court are people who contradict these hadiths: among them Ismāʿīl ibn Ḥammād, Bishr ibn al-Walīd, Bishr ibn Ghiyāth, Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa, Yaḥyā ibn Aktham,” and he named others like them. “If their position is true, al-Rashīd was wrong in what he selected for you and if al-Rashīd was right, you should remove those who are wrong.” Al-Maʾmūn took the book and told ʿĪsā, “Perhaps these people have an argument; I shall ask them.” The first to enter was Ismāʿīl ibn Ḥammād. Al-Maʾmūn told him the matter. Ismāʿīl said, “I will deal with this book for you, Commander of the Faithful, and make the argument clear.” Al-Maʾmūn said, “Then attend to it,” and handed him the book. He kept it for some time and then returned it. Al-Maʾmūn read it and found a form of abuse, paid it no attention, and said, “This is no answer on behalf of these people.” He took the book from him. Bishr ibn Ghiyāth entered; he told him the matter, and Bishr said, “I will deal with it for you, Commander of the Faithful.” He took it and later brought a book, saying, “This is its answer.” Al-Maʾmūn read it and found that it rejected the acceptance of solitary reports. He said, “This is no answer on behalf of these people. Your companions cite such reports in some of their questions and begin their books with solitary reports. If it is permissible to act on a solitary report in any matter, it is permissible to act on one in comparable matters; if it is not permissible in anything, why did they put them in their books?” He took back the book he had given him. The next to enter was Yaḥyā ibn Aktham. Al-Maʾmūn told him the matter. He said, “Hand it to me, and I will deal with it for you, Commander of the Faithful.” He kept it a long time; whenever al-Maʾmūn asked, he said, “I have not finished.” Al-Maʾmūn said, “This is taking a long time. Wisdom does not entitle you to this much, in my view, even if you establish your argument: your opponent has explained his disagreement with you and his proof against you in a single book, while perhaps you cannot argue against him in a hundred books.” [The clause concerning wisdom is awkward in the digitized Arabic.] This reached ʿĪsā ibn Abān, who had not previously attended al-Maʾmūn. He composed the small Book of the Argument, beginning with the kinds of reports, how they were transmitted, what must be accepted and rejected, our obligations, and what to do upon hearing contradictory reports, clarifying these matters. He then arranged chapters for those hadiths and in each explained Abū Ḥanīfa’s argument and position, its transmitted evidence, and its analogical reasoning, investigating it thoroughly. He worked on his book until it reached al-Maʾmūn. Having read it, he said, “This is the proper answer on behalf of these people.” Then he began reciting: They envied the youth because they could not attain his striving; thus they are his enemies and adversaries like the co-wives of a beautiful woman, saying of her face, out of envy and malice, “It is ugly.” He then asked who had composed the book and about his circumstances. When he was told, he gave orders concerning him, and from that day he began attending with the jurists.

ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad informed us: Abū Bakr al-Dāmghānī the jurist informed us: al-Ṭaḥāwī informed us: Abū Khāzim narrated to us: ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Nāʾil narrated to us, saying: ʿĪsā ibn Hārūn al-Hāshimī was al-Maʾmūn’s contemporary and had heard hadith with him and al-Amīn when Hārūn summoned people from different lands so the two could hear from them. This ʿĪsā ibn Hārūn collected enough hadiths to fill a book, placed it before al-Maʾmūn, and said, “May God set the Commander of the Faithful right! These are hadiths I heard with you from the teachers al-Rashīd chose for you. Now those who frequent your court are people who contradict these hadiths: among them Ismāʿīl ibn Ḥammād, Bishr ibn al-Walīd, Bishr ibn Ghiyāth, Muḥammad ibn Samāʿa, Yaḥyā ibn Aktham,” and he named others like them. “If their position is true, al-Rashīd was wrong in what he selected for you and if al-Rashīd was right, you should remove those who are wrong.” Al-Maʾmūn took the book and told ʿĪsā, “Perhaps these people have an argument; I shall ask them.” The first to enter was Ismāʿīl ibn Ḥammād. Al-Maʾmūn told him the matter. Ismāʿīl said, “I will deal with this book for you, Commander of the Faithful, and make the argument clear.” Al-Maʾmūn said, “Then attend to it,” and handed him the book. He kept it for some time and then returned it. Al-Maʾmūn read it and found a form of abuse, paid it no attention, and said, “This is no answer on behalf of these people.” He took the book from him. Bishr ibn Ghiyāth entered; he told him the matter, and Bishr said, “I will deal with it for you, Commander of the Faithful, and make the argument clear.” He took it and later brought a book, saying, “This is its answer.” Al-Maʾmūn read it and found that it rejected the acceptance of solitary reports. He said, “This is no answer on behalf of these people. Your companions cite such reports in some of their questions and begin their books with solitary reports. If it is permissible to act on a solitary report in any matter, it is permissible to act on one in comparable matters; if it is not permissible in anything, why did they put them in their books?” He took back the book he had given him. The next to enter was Yaḥyā ibn Aktham. Al-Maʾmūn told him the matter. He said, “Hand it to me, and I will deal with it for you, Commander of the Faithful.” He kept it a long time; whenever al-Maʾmūn asked, he said, “I have not finished.” Al-Maʾmūn said, “This is taking a long time. Wisdom does not entitle you to this much, in my view, even if you establish your argument: your opponent has explained his disagreement with you and his proof against you in a single book, while perhaps you cannot argue against him in a hundred books.” [The clause concerning wisdom is awkward in the digitized Arabic.] This reached ʿĪsā ibn Abān, who had not previously attended al-Maʾmūn. He composed the small Book of the Argument, beginning with the kinds of reports, how they were transmitted, what must be accepted and rejected, our obligations, and what to do upon hearing contradictory reports, clarifying these matters. He then arranged chapters for those hadiths and in each explained Abū Ḥanīfa’s argument and position, its transmitted evidence, and its analogical reasoning, investigating it thoroughly. He worked on his book until it reached al-Maʾmūn. Having read it, he said, “This is the proper answer on behalf of these people.” Then he began reciting: They envied the youth because they could not attain his striving; thus they are his enemies and adversaries like the co-wives of a beautiful woman, saying of her face, out of envy and malice, “It is ugly.” He then asked who had composed the book and about his circumstances. When he was told, he gave orders concerning him, and from that day he began attending with the jurists.