Sunan Ibn Majah
Sunan Ibn Majah 2623
حَدَّثَنَا عُثْمَانُ، وَأَبُو بَكْرٍ ابْنَا أَبِي شَيْبَةَ قَالاَ حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو خَالِدٍ الأَحْمَرُ، ح وَحَدَّثَنَا عُثْمَانُ بْنُ أَبِي شَيْبَةَ، قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا جَرِيرٌ، وَعَبْدُ الرَّحِيمِ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ، جَمِيعًا عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ إِسْحَاقَ، عَنِ الْحَارِثِ بْنِ فُضَيْلٍ، أَظُنُّهُ عَنِ ابْنِ أَبِي الْعَوْجَاءِ، وَاسْمُهُ، سُفْيَانُ عَنْ أَبِي شُرَيْحٍ الْخُزَاعِيِّ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم " مَنْ أُصِيبَ بِدَمٍ أَوْ خَبْلٍ - وَالْخَبْلُ الْجُرْحُ - فَهُوَ بِالْخِيَارِ بَيْنَ إِحْدَى ثَلاَثٍ فَإِنْ أَرَادَ الرَّابِعَةَ فَخُذُوا عَلَى يَدَيْهِ أَنْ يَقْتُلَ أَوْ يَعْفُوَ أَوْ يَأْخُذَ الدِّيَةَ فَمَنْ فَعَلَ شَيْئًا مِنْ ذَلِكَ فَعَادَ فَإِنَّ لَهُ نَارَ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدًا مُخَلَّدًا فِيهَا أَبَدًا " .
Unreviewed translation. All hadiths in this collection are available in five languages. Titles and introductions may remain in Arabic.
Uthman and Abu Bakr, the two sons of Abu Shaybah, reported to us: Abu Khalid al-Ahmar reported to us. Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah reported to us: Jarir and Abd al-Rahim ibn Sulayman reported to us. All three routes go back to Muhammad ibn Ishaq, from al-Harith ibn Fudayl—whom I think reported from Ibn Abi al-Awja, named Sufyan—from Abu Shurayh al-Khuza‘i, who said: The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said, ‘Whoever suffers a killing or a wound—the wound is meant by khabl—has a choice among three. If he seeks a fourth, restrain him: he may kill, pardon, or take blood money. Whoever chooses any of these and then transgresses again will have the Fire of Hell, abiding there forever.’
Notes and open questions — unreviewed
The narrator explicitly marks uncertainty about the name and link in the chain (‘I think’). The Arabic lists three options and warns against a fourth; the precise referent of ‘transgresses again’ is rendered literally.
فَمَنْ فَعَلَ شَيْئًا مِنْ ذَلِكَ فَعَادَ
The object of the return/transgression is implicit in the Arabic; the witness supplies ‘kills the killer.’
Should the implied act be made explicit in this legal context?