of this ḥadīth with respect to its chain of transmission, and for clearing away the doubt concerning its text. He alone grants success; there is no deity but Him.

Later I came across a statement by a modern-day author who, in his book Adab al-Jāḥiẓ (p. 90), rejects the authenticity of this ḥadīth in order to defend his teacher al-Jāḥiẓ. He writes, “If this ḥadīth were authentic, it would be a major calamity for the great majority of the Muslim community, for it would condemn most of them to everlasting hellfire. And had this ḥadīth been sound, Abū Bakr would never have fought those who refused to pay the zakāh, regarding them as having apostasised…”—and so on. Merely citing his words spares one the effort of refuting them, for their invalidity is plain, especially after reading the preceding remarks of Shaykh al-Maqbilī.

As for his expression “everlasting hellfire,” it has no basis in the ḥadīth; the writer inserted it on his own so he could use it as a pretext for attacking the ḥadīth. The report is free of all such allegations, as we have clarified—praise be to Allah for His enabling grace.

205 – “When you see that people have broken their covenants, betrayed their trusts, and become like this”—he interlaced his fingers—“I stood up and said, ‘How should I conduct myself at that time? May Allah ransom me for you.’ He replied, ‘Stay in your house, keep control of your tongue, take hold of what you recognise as right and leave what you disapprove of. Mind your own private affairs and leave alone the affairs of the general public.’”

Abū Dāwūd (2/438), al-Ḥākim (4/525) and Aḥmad (2/212) narrated it—the wording is Aḥmad’s—from Hilāl ibn Khabbāb Abū al-ʿAlāʾ, who said: ‘ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr told me: “While we were gathered around the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, they spoke about the fitnah (civil strife), or it was mentioned in his presence, and he said”—and he related the ḥadīth.

Al-Ḥākim said, “Its chain of transmission is authentic,” and al-Dhahabī concurred. Al-Munadhirī and al-ʿIrāqī said: