“He was not fit for knowledge to be recorded from him. I asked Sa‘id ibn ‘Isa ibn Tulayd about him, and he dissuaded me from him, saying: ‘The hadith he narrates is fabricated,’ or words to that effect.”

Know that the scholars have differed over this hadith of Ibn ‘Ukaym, both in terms of its transmission and its substantive evaluation. As for its transmission, some of them faulted it for being mursal and for inconsistency. This objection is refuted, for even if it were conceded with respect to some chains, it does not hold with respect to the others, as I explained in the source mentioned above. For this reason, some of the early scholars regarded it as strong, among them Imam Ahmad, may Allah Most High have mercy on him. His son Salih said in his Masa’il (p. 160):

“My father said: ‘Allah has forbidden carrion, and the hide is part of carrion. I incline toward the hadith of Ibn ‘Ukaym, and I hope that it is authentic: “Do not derive benefit from a carcass, whether from its hide or its sinew.”’”

Ahmad said: “I do not consider any hadith concerning the tanning of carrion to be authentic, and the hadith of Ibn ‘Ukaym is the soundest of them!” This is what he said, may Allah have mercy on him, although fifteen hadiths concerning tanning have been reported, as al-Shawkani cited in Nayl al-Awtar (1/54). Some of them are found in the two Sahihs, and they have been documented in Ghayat al-Maram (25–29).

As for its substantive evaluation, the scholars have differed as to whether tanning renders a hide pure. The majority hold that it does. They have differed, however, over how to answer the hadith under discussion. The soundest explanation is that a hide is skin that has not been tanned, and it is this which is prohibited. Once it has been tanned, it becomes pure. Whoever wishes further detail may consult Nayl al-Awtar and other works.