Responding to the lie about the existence of a Jewish-Christian sect in the Arabian Peninsula that influenced the Qur’an

 In the name of God, the Most Gracious,

the Most Merciful. Many Christians claim that Islam is a Jewish Christian movement that split off from a Jewish Christian sect called the Christians that existed in the Arabian Peninsula and that the Qur’an was influenced by it and took its beliefs and stories. Some of them claim that the Christians mentioned in the Qur’an are in fact the Nazarenes and Ebionites, who are historically known as “Judeo-Christian” sects.

The response to this ridiculous lie is from several points

. First: The “Judeo-Christian” sects such as the Ebionites and the Nazarenes disappeared before Islam in the third or fourth century and they no longer existed after that .
We read from the Jewish Encyclopedia:
((Aside from these references, Theodoret, however, makes the mistake of confounding the Nazarenes and Ebionites; he is the last one of the Church Fathers to refer to the Nazarenes, who probably were absorbed in the course of the fifth century partly by Judaism and partly by Christianity )) https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/a...1393-nazarenes

. Encyclopedia of ReligionInformation on the Ebionites is scattered over three centuries, from the middle of the second to the middle of the fifth, suggesting that the sect had a continuous history as a distinct group from the earliest period. A continuous history cannot be documented, however, and it is more likely that the persistence of people called by the name Ebionites is evidence that within Christianity, in spite of the break with Judaism and the bitter polemic against Jewish practices, there continued to spring up groups of Christians who believed that one could be a Christian and still observe the Jewish law….
There was a resurgence of Jewish Christianity in the late fourth century, encouraged by Jewish messianism and the Emperor Julian's attempt to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. Jews began to hope for their return to Jerusalem and Judaea, a rebuilding of the Temple, and restoration of sacrifices—the beginning of a Messianic age. After this period little is known of the Ebionites.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/philoso...e3bj65l70gvi1U

We read from the book History of the Jews in the Arab Countries, page 53, by the author Israel Wolfenson, in response to Louis Cheikho and his flimsy hypotheses:
(((It appears from his words that he is not knowledgeable about the history of the Jews in the early days of Christianity, as it is indisputable that a Jewish Christian sect existed at the beginning of its existence at a time when Christianity was a purely Jewish call, and the Christians were a sect of the Jews. This sect disappeared after it spread among the Greeks and the Syrians, and there was no mention of the Jewish Christian sect in the third century AD, and we do not have historical references that prove the existence of a unique Jewish Christian sect in the Arabian Peninsula ))



Second: The Christians of the Arabian Peninsula were confined to two sects: Nestorian and Jacobite Orthodox, neither of which are classified under the concept of “Judeo-Christianity,” and the lack of missionary efforts among the Arab Christians of the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh century .
Mecca and the Hijaz were devoid of Christian presence as a church organization or as missionary efforts,
as the presence of Christian groups and tribes in the Arabian Peninsula was concentrated in three regions:
the north-east of the Arabian Peninsula (the region of Al-Hirah, Basra and Kazima under the rule of the Lakhmids),
the north-west of the Arabian Peninsula (Tabuk, Balqa, Ibna and the Syrian desert in Jordan, Ayla, Dumat Al-Jandal and Tabuk under the rule of the Ghassanids and those who were loyal to them),
and the south-west of the Arabian Peninsula in Najran and Yemen.
As for the Hijaz, Najd and Oman, they were distinguished by the lack of church organization in them, as the Christian presence in them did not rise to the level of the tribe, let alone rise to the level of converting an entire city to Christianity, as the Christians in them were merely scattered individuals.
It is also noticeable that these regions were devoid of missionary activity for the Church,
contrary to those who tried to portray the Hijaz as if it contained dozens of churches and monasteries scattered in the wastelands and deserts, which - according to them - were shelters for Nestorian or Jacobite monks.

We read from the encyclopedia: Catholicism:
(( Before the rise and spread of Nestorianism and Monophysitism, the Arian heresy was the prevailing creed of the Christian Arabs. In the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries Arianism was supplanted by Nestorianism and Monophysitism, which had then become the official creeds of the two most representative Churches of Syria, Egypt, Abyssinia, Mesopotamia, and Persia . ))
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01663a.htm

And we read from the Catholic Encyclopedia
(( Christianity in Arabia had three in centres in the northwest, northeast, and southwest of the peninsula. The first embraces the Kingdom of Ghassan (under Roman rule), the second that of Hira (under Persian power), and the third the kingdoms of Himyar, Yemen, and Najran (under Abyssinian rule). As for central and southeast Arabia, such as Nejd and Oman, it is doubtful whether Christianity made any advance there .))
https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01663a.htm

The Catholic Encyclopedia here removed the Hijaz from the above exception because it followed the extremist theories of Louis Cheikho. However, in 1967 the new Catholic Encyclopedia was issued with some revisions and corrections, including that it no longer relied on what Cheikho wrote and added the Hijaz to those regions that do not contain Christian gatherings and devoid of missionary activity.

We read from the New Catholic Encyclopedia, Part One, Page 620:
((The Hijaz. In speaking of Christians in the Hijaz one must limit the term to mean Mecca, Tayma ̄', Khaibar, al-T: a ̄'if, and Medina. The existing evidence refers to the time just before or during the lifetime of Muh: ammad.The Hijaz had not been touched by Christian preaching. Hence the organization of a Christian church was neither to be expected nor found. What Christians resided there were principally individuals from other countries who re-tained some Christianity. Such were African (mainly coptic) slaves; tradespeople who came to the fairs from Syria, from Yemen, and from among the Christian Arabs under the Ghassanids or Lakhmids; Abyssinian merce-nary soldiers; and miscellaneous others whose Christiani- ty was evidenced only by their names. The few native Christians whose names have come down to us furnishing us with more questions than answers. This Christianity had the marks that go with want of organization. It lacked instruction and fervor. It is therefore not surprising that it offered no opposition to Islam . Finally it is to be carried in mind that it was the Christianity in Arabia, here briefly sketched, that projected the image of Christianity seen in the Qur’a ̄n.))

We read from Richard Bell’s book The Origin of Islam in its Christian Environment, page 42
((From the northwest it spread into the northern center of the peninsula and southward to the shores of the Red Sea but - and this is important - in spite of traditions to the effect that the picture of Jesus was found on one of the pillars of the Ka'ba, there is no good evidence of any seats of Christianity in the Hijaz or in the near neighborhood of Mecca or even of Medina ))

And we read from the book of knowledge by Ibn Qutaybah, Part One
: ((The religions of the Arabs in the pre-Islamic era:
Christianity was in: “Rabi’ah”, “Ghassan”, and some of “Quda’ah” .
Judaism was in: “Himyar”, “Banu Kinanah”, “Banu al-Harith ibn Ka’b”, and “Kinda”. Zoroastrianism
was in: “Tamim”.
Among them: Zararah ibn ‘Adas al-Tamimi, and his son: Hajib ibn Zararah - who married his daughter then regretted it.
Among them: Al-Aqra’ ibn Habis - who was a Zoroastrian, and Abu Sud - the grandfather of: Wakee’ ibn Hassan - who was a Zoroastrian.
Heresy was in “Quraish”, they took it from “Al-Hirah”.
And “Banu Hanifa” took a god from Hais “1” in the pre-Islamic era, and they worshipped it for a long time, then a famine struck them and they ate it, so a man from “Banu Tamim” said: [Khafif]
Hanifa ate her lord from an old hunger in her and from need. And
he said: Another: [Fragmented complete]
Hanifa ate her Lord... In a time of oppression and famine,
they did not warn of their Lord... The bad consequences and consequences))
However, the investigation says that Banu Al-Harith bin Kaab were Christians, as were Kinda (and they are from Najran and Yemen), since the Jews among them are a minority compared to the Christians.

What indicates this meaning is that when Zaid bin Amr bin Nufail went to ask about the religion after abandoning the idols, he only went to the monks and rabbis of Ash-Sham and did not mention that he sought refuge with any of the Christian slaves of Quraysh.
We read from Sahih Al-Bukhari, Book of the Virtues of the Helpers:
((3827 - Musa said: Salim bin Abdullah told me, and I do not know him except that he narrated it on the authority of Ibn Umar: “ That Zaid bin Amr bin Nufail went out to the Levant to ask about religion and follow it. He met a Jewish scholar and asked him about their religion. He said: I may follow your religion, so tell me. He said: You will not follow our religion until you take your share of Allah’s wrath. Zaid said: I only flee from Allah’s wrath, and I will never bear any of Allah’s wrath. How can I bear it? Can you guide me to someone else? He said: I do not know him except that he is a Hanif. Zaid said: What is a Hanif? He said: The religion of Abraham was neither Jewish nor Christian, and he worshipped none but Allah. So Zaid went out and met a Christian scholar and mentioned something similar. He said: You will never be of our religion until you take your share of Allah’s curse. He said: I only flee from Allah’s curse, and I will never bear anything of Allah’s curse or His wrath. How can I? Can you guide me to someone else? He said: I do not know him except that he is a Hanif. He said: What is a Hanif? He said: The religion of Abraham. He was neither Jewish nor Christian, and he did not worship except Allah. When Zaid saw what they said about Abraham, peace be upon him, he went out. When he came out, he raised his hands and said: O Allah, I bear witness that I am on the religion of Abraham.

Third: The knowledge of the Arabs of the Arabian Peninsula regarding Christian doctrines was limited to only three sects: Nestorianism, Orthodox Melkiteism, and Orthodox Jacobiteism, which suggests to us that they thought Christianity was limited to these three sects, and the reason for that is due to the absence of any other Christian sect with which they mixed in the Arabian Peninsula .
We read from Ibn Kathir’s interpretation of Surat An-Nisa’:
“Ibn Abi Hatim said: Ahmad ibn Sinan told us, Abu Mu’awiyah told us, on the authority of Al-A’mash, on the authority of Al-Minhal ibn Amr, on the authority of Saeed ibn Jubayr, on the authority of Ibn Abbas, who said: When Allah wanted to raise Jesus to heaven, he came out to his companions - and in the house there were twelve men from the disciples - meaning: He came out to them from a spring in the house, and his head was dripping with water, and he said: There is one among you who will disbelieve in me twelve times, after he believed in me. Then he said: Which of you will have my likeness cast upon him, so that he will be killed in my place and be with me in my degree? A young man, one of the youngest of them, stood up, and he said to him: Sit down. Then he repeated it to them, and that young man stood up, and he said: Sit down. Then he repeated it to them, and the young man stood up and said: I am. He said: You are that one. So the likeness of Jesus was cast upon him, and Jesus was raised from a window in the house to heaven. He said: The Jews came to demand it, so they took the likeness and killed him, then crucified him, and some of them disbelieved in him twelve times, after they believed in him, and they dispersed .” Three groups. One group said: God was among us as long as He willed, then He ascended to heaven. These are the Jacobites. Another group said: The Son of God was among us as long as He willed, then God raised him up to Himself. These are the Nestorians. Another group said: The servant and messenger of God was among us as long as He willed, then God raised him up to Himself. These are the Muslims. The two infidel women conspired against the Muslim woman, so they killed her. Islam remained obliterated until God sent Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace. This is a correct chain of transmission to Ibn Abbas , and it was narrated by Al-Nasa’i on the authority of Abu Kurayb, on the authority of Abu Mu’awiyah, in a similar manner. More than one of the early Muslims mentioned that he said to them: “Which of you will be cast into my likeness and be killed in my place, and he will be my companion in Paradise?”

Fourth: Assuming that these sects existed in the Arabian Peninsula, we rule out that they would have an impact on the beliefs of the Qur’an, since the Gospels that they believed in did not contain the same stories of Christ, peace be upon him, and Mary, peace be upon her, in the Qur’an (the birth of Christ, his speaking in the cradle, his creation from clay in the form of a bird, the vow of Mary’s mother, peace be upon her, to her daughter to God Almighty, and the drawing of lots among the people as to which of them would take care of Mary, peace be upon her) .

The Gospel of the Ebionites was the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, and it is generally the same as the Gospel of Matthew today in general, but with the deletion of the first two chapters .
For example, we read from the Encyclopedia of Religion
((The Ebionites had their own gospel, but it is not possible to reconstruct its content in any detail. Ancient writers mention three Jewish Christian gospels, but because of the fragmentary nature of our information, it is difficult to distinguish these works clearly. The Gospel of the Ebionites (a modern design) may have been similar to the Gospel of Matthew, but it did not include the narrative of the virgin birth and Jesus' infancy). .))
https://www.encyclopedia.com/philoso...G1YQXDbhZimIS0

The Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was also relied upon by the Nazarenes .
We read from Dr. Bart Ehrman’s book Lost Scriptures: books that did not make it into the new testament Page 9
Jewish Christians in the early centuries of the church were widely thought to have preferred the Gospel of Matthew to all others, since it is Matthew that stresses the importance of keeping the Jewish Law down to every jot and tittle (5:17–20) and that emphasizes, more than any other, the Jewishness of Jesus.1 According to a number of ancient sources, one group of Jewish Christians, sometimes known as the Nazarenes, produced their own version of Matthew, translated into Aramaic, the language of Jesus and of Jews living in Palestine.2 This version would have been produced sometime near the end of the first century or the beginning of the second….
These quotations clearly reveal the Jewish-Christian concerns of the Gospel and show that the Gospel contained stories of Jesus' baptism, public ministry, death, and resurrection. I clearly did not include, however, the first two chapters of Matthew's Gospel, which record the events surrounding Jesus' miraculous birth . For according to many Jewish Christians, Jesus was not born of a virgin, but was a natural human being who was specially chosen to be the Messiah because God considered him to be more righteous than anyone else.

Today scholars debate whether the church fathers were right in thinking that the Gospel of the Nazareans was an Aramaic version of Matthew; it may have instead been an original composition , in Aramaic, based on oral traditions about Jesus that were in wide circulation and available both to this author and the author of Matthew.
https://www.baytagoodah.com/uploads/...NPr1OLZ4TsBm4s

Dr. Bart has disagreed with some critics. In the Gospel of the Ebionites, he went on to say that the Gospel is a reconciliation between the three Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke, instead of considering it the Gospel of Matthew in Hebrew with the deletion of the first two chapters.
We read from the previous source, page 12
((One of the sacred books these Jewish Christians appealed to in support of their views was known in antiquity as the Gospel of the Ebionites. Regrettably, the book as a whole has been lost; but we are fortunate to have some quotations of it in the writings of an opponent of the Ebionites, the fourth-century heresy-hunter, Epiphanius of Salamis. These quotations give us a good idea of ​​what the entire Gospel must have looked like. It was written in Greek, and represented a kind of harmony of the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. This can be seen most clearly in the account of the voice at Jesus' baptism says slightly different things. These differences are harmonized, however, in the Gospel according to the Ebionites, where the voice comes from heaven three times, saying something slightly different on each occasion, corre* sponding to the words found in each of the three earlier Gospels.))

The differences between the Muslim faith and the faith of these people:

1. The Nazarenes and the Ebionites do not deny the crucifixion, but rather affirm the crucifixion, as we have previously mentioned that their Gospel is the Gospel of Matthew with the first two chapters deleted (and some have gone, as we have previously mentioned about Bart Ehrman, that the Gospel of the Ebionites is a reconciliation between the three synoptic Gospels, Matthew, Mark, and Luke), while the Qur’an denies the crucifixion of Christ, peace and blessings be upon him.
Allah the Almighty said: ((And their saying, "Indeed, we killed the Messiah, Jesus, the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah ." But they killed him not, nor crucified him, but it was made to appear so to them. And indeed, those who differ about it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. (157)))

2. Some critics have mentioned that the Nazarenes and the Ebionites did not believe in the virgin birth of Christ, peace and blessings be upon him, and this contradicts the explicit text of the Qur’an.
Allah the Almighty said: ((And mention in the Book, Mary, when she withdrew from her family to a place in the East (16) And took a veil apart from them. Then We sent to her Our Spirit, and he represented himself to her as a well-proportioned man. (17) She said, "Indeed, I seek refuge in the Most Merciful from you, if you should be fearing Allah." (18) He said, "I am only the Messenger of your Lord to give you a pure boy." (19) She said, "How can I have a boy when I have not been given a son?" No man has touched me, and I am not unchaste. (20) He said, “Thus said your Lord: It is easy for Me, and We will make him a sign to the people and a mercy from Us, and it is a matter [already] decreed.” (21) So she conceived him and withdrew with him to a remote place. (22) Then the birth pangs drove her to the trunk of a palm tree. She said, “Oh, I wish I had died before this and was in oblivion, forgotten.” (23) Then he called to her from beneath her, "Do not grieve; your Lord has provided beneath you a stream." (24) And shake toward you the trunk of the palm tree; it will drop upon you ripe, fresh dates. (25) So eat and drink and be refreshed. But if you see from among mankind anyone, say, "Indeed, I have vowed to the Most Merciful a fast, so I will not speak to any human being today." (26) So she brought him to her people, carrying him. They said, "O Mary, you have certainly been given a great reward." You have done something unprecedented (27) O sister of Aaron, your father was not a man of evil, nor was your mother unchaste (28) So she pointed to him. They said, How can we speak to one who is in the cradle, a child? (29) He said, Indeed, I am the servant of Allah. He has given me the Scripture and made me a prophet (30) And has made me blessed wherever I am, and has enjoined upon me prayer and zakah as long as I live (31) And to be dutiful to my mother, and I have not (32) And peace be upon me the day I was born and the day I die and the day I am raised alive (33))

While we read what Bart Ehrman said in the source we mentioned previously, page 12, about the Nazarenes:
((These quotations clearly reveal the Jewish-Christian concerns of the Gospel and show that the Gospel contained stories of Jesus' baptism, public ministry, death, and resurrection. It evidently did not include, however, the first two chapters of Matthew's Gospel, which record the events surrounding Jesus' miraculous birth. For according to many Jewish Christians, Jesus was not born of a virgin, but was a natural human being who was specially chosen to be the Messiah because God considered him to be more righteous than anyone. else.))

And we read from the Encyclopedia Britannica about Ebionite:
((Most of the features of Ebionite doctrine were anticipated in the teachings of the earlier Qumrān sect, as revealed in the Dead Sea Scrolls. They believed in one God and taught that Jesus was the Messiah and was the true “prophet” mentioned in Deuteronomy 18:15. They rejected the Virgin Birth of Jesus, instead holding that he was the natural son of Joseph and Mary. The Ebionites believed Jesus became the Messiah because he obeyed the Jewish Law. They themselves faithfully followed the Law, although they removed what they regarded as interpolations in order to uphold their teachings, which included vegetarianism, holy poverty, ritual ablutions, and the rejection of animal sacrifices. The Ebionites also held Jerusalem in great veneration.))
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ebionites

And we read from the Encyclopedia of Religion about Ebionites:
((The Ebionites were Jews who accepted Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah (Christ ) while continuing to maintain their identity as Jews. They cultivated relations with Jews as well as Christians though they were welcomed by neither. They followed the Jewish law, insisting on circumcision, keeping the Sabbath and celebrating the Jewish festivals (Yom Kippur, Passover), and observing the dietary laws (eg, abstention from pork) and other Jewish customs. They repudiated the apostle Paul because of his denigration of the Jewish law Jesus as a prophet, an exceptional man in the line of Jewish prophets (as described in Deut. 18:15), and denied the virgin birth. They justified their way of life by appealing to the example of Jesus' life: he was circumcised, observed the Sabbath and celebrated the Jewish festivals, and taught that all the precepts of the law should be observed. They celebrated Easter on the same day that the Jews celebrated the Passover, and they held the city of Jerusalem in high esteem.))
https:/ /www.encyclopedia.com/philoso...eral/ebionites

Fifthly, in addition to the previous reason also: Assuming the existence of a Jewish-Christian sect in the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh century, it is difficult to say that the Qur’an was influenced by them, because the knowledge of the Christians of the Arabian Peninsula of the books of their books It was superficial .

The Christians of the Prophetic Peninsula in the seventh century were distinguished by their lack of knowledge of the details of their religion and their book, as we know that there is no Arabic translation of the Old and New Testaments at the time of the prophetic mission, nor do we find any documentation of any theological debates conducted by the Christians of the Arabian Peninsula, nor any display of their beliefs and details in their poetry!!! This has led critics to say that the knowledge of the Christians of the Arabian Peninsula about Christianity was very superficial and naive!!!

Non-Islamic sources:
We read from Spanish Islam: A History of the Moslems in Spain By Reinhart Dozy page 13
In Mohammed's time, three religions shared Arabia - Judaism, Christianity and a vague form of Polytheism. The Jewish tribes alone were sincerely attached to their faith and were alone intolerant. In the early history of Arabia, persecutions are rare, and when they do occur, it is usually the Jews to blame.
Christianity could count but a few adepts, for most of those who professed the faith had but very superficial knowledge of its tenets.

It is noteworthy that the Christians of the Arabian Peninsula, although most of them were Nestorian or Jacobite Orthodox, their knowledge of all this was superficial, and this was not limited to their common people, but extended to their elite, such as their patriarchs, monks, and priests!!!!!
We read from the Catholic Encyclopedia:
Before the rise and spread of Nestorianism and Monophysitism, the Arian heresy was the prevailing creed of the Christian Arabs.
In the fifth, sixth, and seventh centuries Arianism was supplanted by Nestorianism and Monophysitism,
which had then become the official creeds of the two most representative Churches of Syria, Egypt, Abyssinia, Mesopotamia, and Persia. Like the Arabian Jews,
the Christian Arabs did not, as a rule, particularly in the times immediately before and after Mohammed, attach much importance to the practical observance of their religion.
The Arabs of pre-Islamic times were notorious for their indifference to their theoretical and practical religious beliefs and observances. Every religion and practice was welcomed so long as it was compatible with Arab freedom of conscience and sensuality; And,
as Wellhausen truly remarks, although Christian thought and sentiment could have been infused among the Arabs only through the channel of poetry, it is in this that Christian spirituality performs rather a silent part
(op. cit., 203).
Arabian Christianity was a seed sunn on stony ground, whose product had no power of resistance when the heat came; it perished without leaving a trace when Islam appeared.
It seems strange that these Christian Arabs, who had bishops, and priests, and churches, and even heresies, of their own apparently took no steps towards translating into their language any of the Old and New Testament books; Or, if any such translation existed, it has left no trace.
The same strange fact is also true in the case of the numerous Jews of Yemen (Margoliouth, op. cit., 35, and Harnack, Expansion of Christianity, II, 300). Of these Emmanuel Deutsch remarks that, “Acquainted with the Halachah and Haggada, they seemed, under the peculiar story-loving influence of their countrymen, to have cultivated the latter with all its gorgeous hues and colors” [Remains of Emmanuel Deutsch, Islam (New York), 92].
As to the Christians, at least the bishops, the priests, and the monks must have had some religious books; but as we know nothing of their existence, we are forced to suppose that these books were written in a language which they learned abroad, probably in Syria.

https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01663a.htm

Islamic sources:
Among them is what Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said about the Christians of Taghlib, since Christianity was for them a means to drink alcohol only!!
We read from Al-Tabari’s (may Allah have mercy on him) interpretation of the fifth verse of Surat Al-Ma’idah:
((11230- Ya`qub ibn Ibrahim narrated to us, he said, Ibn `Ulayyah narrated to us, on the authority of Ayyub, on the authority of Muhammad, on the authority of `Ubaydah, he said, `Ali, may God be pleased with him, said: Do not
eat the slaughtered animals of the Christians of Banu Taghlib, for they only cling to Christianity by drinking wine.
(180)
Abu Ja`far said: These reports from `Ali, may God be pleased with him, only indicate that he used to forbid the slaughtered animals of the Christians of Banu Taghlib, because they are not Christians, because they do not permit what the Christians permit, and forbid what they forbid, except for wine.
And whoever claims (182) a religion but does not cling to anything of it, then he is closer to disavowing it than to joining it and its people
. (183) Therefore, `Ali forbade eating the slaughtered animals of the Christians of Banu Taghlib, not because they are not from the Children of Israel.))

Sheikh Ahmad Shakir, may God have mercy on him, said in his investigation of the interpretation of al-Tabari, may God have mercy on him:
(((180) The trace: 11230- Narrated by Al-Shafi’i in Al-Umm 2: 196, and Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Sunan 9: 284, and Al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar referred to it in (Al-Fath 9: 549), and he said: “It
was narrated by Al-Shafi’i and Abd Al-Razzaq with authentic chains of transmission.”