As for the first, it was Abu Mu‘awiyah, who narrated: “Al-A‘mash narrated to us from Shaqiq, from him.” However, he inverted the text of the hadith, making the report attributed to the Prophet into one attributed to the Companion, and the report attributed to the Companion into one attributed to the Prophet.

It was also recorded by Ibn Khuzaymah, Abu ‘Awanah in his Sahih (1/17), and Ahmad (1/382 and 425). After citing Ibn Numayr’s narration from al-A‘mash, which accords with the narration of the group from him, Ibn Khuzaymah said:

“Ibn Numayr reversed the text from what Abu Mu‘awiyah narrated. Shu‘bah concurred with him in the meaning of the text, and Shu‘bah and Ibn Numayr are more reliable regarding the text of the report than Abu Mu‘awiyah. Sayyar Abu al-Hakam likewise followed them both...” He then cited his narration.

For this reason, al-Hafiz said in al-Fath (3/111):

“The narrations in the two Sahihs do not differ in that the report attributed to the Prophet contains the warning, while the report attributed to the Companion contains the promise. Al-Humaydi claimed in al-Jam‘—and Mughultay followed him in his commentary, as did those who relied upon him—that Muslim’s narration through Waki‘ and Ibn Numayr has the reverse wording:

‘Whoever dies without associating anything with Allah will enter Paradise.’ And I said: ‘Whoever dies associating anything with Allah will enter the Fire.’

It seems that the reason for this error was the reversed wording found in the route of Waki‘ recorded by Abu ‘Awanah and al-Isma‘ili. However, al-Isma‘ili clarified that what is preserved from Waki‘ is as it appears in al-Bukhari. He said: Rather, what is preserved is that Abu Mu‘awiyah alone inverted it (1). Ibn Khuzaymah decisively affirmed this in his Sahih, and the correct version is that narrated by the group. This is also what sound reasoning requires, because the aspect of warning is established by the Quran, and the sunnah has come in accordance with it; thus, it requires no inference, unlike