I say: Their disagreement over Thābit diverted them all from noticing the real defect in the chain of transmission—namely, its interruption.

Thirdly, I believe that if someone were to deem it defective because of ʿAttāb ibn Bashīr rather than Thābit ibn ʿAjlān, he would not be far from correct; for ʿAttāb ranks below him in trustworthiness, as is evident on consulting their respective entries in al-Tahdhīb. Sufficient proof of this is al-Hāfiẓ’s statement concerning ʿAttāb: “Truthful, but prone to error,” whereas concerning Thābit he said: “Truthful.”

In sum, this chain of transmission is weak because it is interrupted and because of ʿAttāb’s poor retention. However, the portion attributed to the Prophet is corroborated by the hadith of Khālid ibn Aslam, the freedman of ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, who said: “I went out with ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUmar, and a Bedouin caught up with him and asked, ‘What about Allah’s words: “Those who hoard gold and silver and do not spend it in Allah’s path”?’ Ibn ʿUmar said to him: ‘Whoever hoards it and does not pay its zakah, woe to him. This was before zakah was ordained; when it was ordained, Allah made it a purification for wealth.’ Then he turned and said: ‘I would not mind if I possessed gold equal to Mount Uḥud, so long as I knew its amount, paid its zakah, and used it in obedience to Allah, the Mighty and Majestic.’”

Ibn Mājah (1787) and al-Bayhaqī (4/82) recorded it through the route of Ibn Shihāb, who said: Khālid ibn Aslam narrated it to me thus. Al-Bukhārī also cited it in suspended form, abridged, in (3/250). Its chain of transmission is authentic.

Although it is halted at Ibn ʿUmar, it carries the ruling of a report attributed to the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, because it concerns the occasions of revelation, which can only be known through information received from the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him. This hadith of Ibn ʿUmar is extremely important in the exegesis of this verse concerning spending, for its apparent meaning is that a Muslim must spend all the gold and silver he possesses. Some Islamic parties in the present age have adopted this apparent meaning, without taking heed of this hadith, which clarifies its intended sense: it applied before zakah—the purification of wealth—was made obligatory. Once zakah was ordained, it qualified the verse and clarified that what is meant is the obligatory portion of one’s wealth that must be given as zakah.

This is also indicated by all the other hadiths that warn against withholding zakah, as well as by the conduct of the righteous early generations, for