and also destroying one of the affirmed Islamic rulings, i.e. forcing those who do not pay Zak?t to do so even if it costs launching war against them. (1)
May All?h ( - عز وجل -) shower His mercy on Ibn Hazm who said about this story: ‘Tha‘labah is at least a Muslim; it is incumbent upon Ab? Bakr and ‘Umar to accept his Zak?t, no doubt about that. If he was a K?fir [disbeliever], he must not be allowed to live in the Arabian Peninsula in the first place. Accordingly, this story is a false one.
Besides, in the story’s chain of narrators, there is Ma‘?n Ibn Raf?‘ah, Al-Q?sim Ibn Abdir Rahm?n and Abdil M?lik Al-Alh?n? and all of them are weak narrators’. (2)
(1) All Muhaddithin and ‘Ulamah considered this story as a weak one unlike the interpreters of the meanings of the Holy Qur’?n; the latter mention it when interpreting S?rat At-Tawbah.
Both Ad?b Al-Himish in his “Tha’labah Ibn Hatib As-Sah?b? Al-Muftara Alaih” and Sal?m Al-Hil?l? in his treatise “Ash-Shih?buth Th?qib Fith Thabbi An Tha‘labah Ibn Hatib” compiled on this story and affirmed it being a fabricated one.
(2) “Al-Muhall?” (vol. 11 / pp.207 - 8).