Al-Dulabi narrated it through a chain of transmission all of whose narrators are known and trustworthy, and are included among the narrators covered in al-Tahdhib. Thus, it is good, were it not for Ibn Ishaq’s non-explicit mode of transmission.

Having thus documented and investigated the reports, and distinguished the authentic hadiths concerning this matter from the weak ones, I may now turn to the intended outcome: its legal aspect. I say: The scholars have differed over the question of adopting Abu al-Qasim as a kunyah, holding three views, which al-Hafiz related in al-Fath. He cited the evidence for them, discussed them, and clarified their respective strengths and weaknesses. After that, I have no doubt that the correct view is absolute prohibition, whether one’s name is Muhammad or otherwise, because of the sound and explicit hadiths prohibiting it, which are free from any weighty opposing evidence, as has preceded.

This is also the established position of Imam al-Shafi‘i, may Allah have mercy on him. Al-Bayhaqi narrated with an authentic chain of transmission from him that he said: “It is not lawful for anyone to adopt Abu al-Qasim as a kunyah, whether his name is Muhammad or something else.” Al-Bayhaqi said: “We have also narrated a statement to this effect from Tawus al-Yamani, may Allah have mercy on him.”

Further supporting the above is the hadith of Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, who said: “O Messenger of Allah, tell me: if a child is born to me after you, may I name him Muhammad and give him your kunyah?” He replied: “Yes.” Ali said: “That was a concession granted to me.” Al-Tirmidhi narrated it (2846) and said: