for his sustenance, to take whatever he needs to sustain himself from any place he finds it, whether it is privately owned or state property; it then becomes lawful property belonging to him, and he may obtain it by force. If a hungry person takes food to eat, that food becomes his property!”

The error in this view is very clear, for several reasons, the foremost being that it contradicts the hadith: the hungry person does not acquire ownership of the food he takes so long as he can find an alternative to it. Moreover, a person in need has lawful avenues that he must pursue, such as borrowing without interest, asking people for an amount that is legally sufficient for him, and other possible means. So why did the Shaykh—may Allah pardon him—disregard these avenues and permit an individual to take property by force without requiring him to pursue these lawful means? I have no doubt that, if this opinion of the Shaykh’s were to spread among the people, it would lead to evils whose consequences none but Allah Most High knows.

2581 — “Recite the Quran according to seven modes; all of them are healing and sufficient.”

Al-Harbi narrated it in Gharīb al-Ḥadīth (5/142/2): Musaddad narrated to us; Yahya narrated to us, from Humayd, from Anas, attributing it to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).

I say: This is an authentic chain of transmission according to al-Bukhari’s criteria. Musaddad was Ibn Musarhad. However, he was contradicted in its chain of transmission, making it clear that this is one of Anas’s mursal reports. Yet the mursal reports of the Companions are authentic, as is established in hadith methodology—especially since it has been confirmed that Anas received it from Ubayy ibn Kaʿb, from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Imam Ahmad said (5/114): Yahya ibn Saʿid narrated it to us... from Anas, that Ubayy said: “Nothing has troubled my heart since I embraced Islam except when I recited a verse...” Then he cited the hadith.