Its isnād is severely weak, and this particular wording is not strengthened by an independently sound route. Al-Albānī likewise classified it as munkar.
Chain: Ibn Mājah → Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis → Kathīr ibn Sulaym → Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him) → the Prophet ﷺ.
Rijāl: (1) Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis al-Ḥimmānī, Abū Muḥammad al-Kūfī: Ḍaʿīf. Al-Bukhārī said, “His ḥadīth is inconsistent.” Abū Zurʿah initially narrated from him but subsequently abandoned his reports. Ibn Numayr stated that he did not consider Jubārah an intentional liar, but fabricated reports would be presented to him and he would narrate them. Ibn ʿAdī similarly observed that some of his reports had no corroboration, while judging his principal defect to be heedlessness rather than deliberate fabrication. Ibn Ḥajar classified him as ḍaʿīf.
(2) Kathīr ibn Sulaym al-Ḍabbī al-Madāʾinī: Severely weak. Ibn Maʿīn and al-Dāraquṭnī declared him weak; al-Bukhārī described him as munkar al-ḥadīth; al-Nasāʾī called him matrūk al-ḥadīth; and Abū Zurʿah described him as wāhī al-ḥadīth. Abū Ḥātim said: “He is weak in ḥadīth, munkar in ḥadīth, and he does not narrate from Anas any report that possesses an established basis through another route.” Ibn ʿAdī stated that most of the reports he transmitted from Anas were not preserved.
(3) Anas ibn Mālik: Companion.
Takhrīj: Ibn Mājah, al-Aṭʿimah, chapter on washing at the time of eating (3260); Ibn ʿAdī, al-Kāmil fī Ḍuʿafāʾ al-Rijāl, in the biography of Kathīr ibn Sulaym (6/63); Abū al-Shaykh, Akhlāq al-Nabī (686); and Ibn al-Najjār in his continuation of Tārīkh Baghdād. Ibn ʿAdī remarked after presenting Kathīr’s reports from Anas that they were generally unpreserved.
Textual and interpretive note: In this context, al-Sindī explains wuḍūʾ as washing the hands rather than performing the complete ritual ablution. Because the report is munkar, however, it cannot establish washing before and after meals as an independently prescribed Sunnah.

(severely weak). The report’s isnād is very weak because it again proceeds through both Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis and Kathīr ibn Sulaym.
Classification: This is not a direct verbal statement of the Prophet ﷺ. It is a report from Anas describing the Prophet’s customary practice and manner of living; it is therefore marfūʿ in attribution as a report of Prophetic conduct.
Chain: Ibn Mājah → Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis → Kathīr ibn Sulaym → Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him) → an observed practice of the Prophet ﷺ.
Rijāl: For Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis and Kathīr ibn Sulaym, see footnote 1.
Takhrīj: Ibn Mājah, al-Aṭʿimah, chapter on roasted meat (3310); Ibn ʿAdī, al-Kāmil, in the biography of Kathīr ibn Sulaym; Ibn Saʿd, al-Ṭabaqāt al-Kubrā (1/407–408), through another route; and al-Ṭabarānī, al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ (3175), with related transmission. Other routes do not supply sufficient strength to authenticate this precise wording.
Lexical note: A طِنْفِسَة is a small carpet, rug, or thick furnishing. The report depicts the simplicity of the Prophet’s material life: a special rug was not habitually transported for his use.

(weak). Its present thulāthī isnād is ḍaʿīf jiddan. The report possesses additional routes and related wordings, but these are themselves weak, and several ultimately return to Kathīr ibn Sulaym. They lessen the degree of singularity but do not, on the stricter critical assessment here, raise the report to ḥasan.
Chain: Ibn Mājah → Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis → Kathīr ibn Sulaym → Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him) → the Prophet ﷺ.
Rijāl: For Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis and Kathīr ibn Sulaym, see footnote 1.
Takhrīj: Ibn Mājah, al-Aṭʿimah, chapter on hospitality (3356); Ibn Abī al-Dunyā, Qirā al-Ḍayf (46), with the wording “the house in which food is served”; al-Ṭabarānī, Makārim al-Akhlāq (162) and al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ (3174); and al-Bayhaqī, Shuʿab al-Īmān (9177 in the al-Rushd edition). Al-Bayhaqī expressly observed that Kathīr ibn Sulaym was alone in transmitting it from Anas and that a related report from Jābir also possessed a weak isnād. A further version is reported from Ibn ʿAbbās in Ibn Mājah (3357), but its transmission is likewise seriously defective.
Commentary: The passive verbيُغْشَى means “is visited” or “is frequented,” referring to a home regularly visited by guests and those seeking hospitality. The image of the blade reaching the camel’s hump evokes the speed with which the hump (regarded as a prized portion) would be cut when a camel was slaughtered and prepared. The comparison therefore means that goodness and blessing hasten toward the hospitable household with remarkable speed. Although there is no basis for this hadith’s claimed virtues due to the isnad, the virtues of hosting guests are found in other authentic reports, such as: “whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day, should serve his guest generously” (al-Bukhārī, no. 6135).

(severely weak). The weakness of the Ibn Mājah chain must be distinguished from the sound status of the matn through independent transmissions.
Chain: Ibn Mājah → Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis → Kathīr ibn Sulaym → Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him) → the Prophet ﷺ.
Rijāl: For Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis and Kathīr ibn Sulaym, see footnote 1.
Takhrīj of the present route: Ibn Mājah, al-Ṭibb, chapter on cupping (3479); Ibn ʿAdī, al-Kāmil (6/64); and al-Ṭabarānī, al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ (3176).
Corroborating routes: The report is transmitted from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd by al-Tirmidhī (2052), with the wording that every assembly of angels instructed the Prophet ﷺ to command his community to practice cupping. Al-Tirmidhī described that route as ḥasan gharīb. A closely corresponding report from Ibn ʿAbbās states: “I did not pass any assembly of angels on the night of the Night Journey without their saying, ‘You should practice cupping, O Muḥammad.’” It is recorded through multiple routes, including Aḥmad and al-Ḥākim. These independent attestations establish the report’s core meaning despite the severe weakness of Kathīr’s route from Anas. The actual medical practice being a religious prescription or not is disputed among the scholars.
The present isnād is ḍaʿīf jiddan; the matn is acceptable to some scholars through its corroborating routes.

(severely weak). The report’s composite meaning is ṣaḥīḥ through independent corroborating routes.
Chain: Ibn Mājah → Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis → Kathīr ibn Sulaym → Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him) → the Prophet ﷺ.
Rijāl: For Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis and Kathīr ibn Sulaym, see footnote 1.
Takhrīj of the present route: Ibn Mājah, al-Zuhd, chapter on the description of the community of Muḥammad ﷺ (4292); and Ibn ʿAdī, al-Kāmil (6/64), in the biography of Kathīr ibn Sulaym.
Corroboration of the combined wording: A notably close report from Abū Mūsā al-Ashʿarī is recorded by Aḥmad (19658): “Indeed, this community is a community shown mercy. Allah has placed its punishment among its own members. When the Day of Resurrection comes, every one of them will be presented with a man from among the followers of other religions, and it will be said: ‘This shall be your ransom from the Fire.’” This independent report closely corroborates both principal components of Ibn Mājah’s wording.
Additional corroboration: The first component is transmitted from Abū Mūsā by Abū Dāwūd (4278): “This community of mine is a community shown mercy; its punishment in this world consists of tribulations, earthquakes, and killing.” The second component is authentically recorded by Muslim (2767a) from Abū Mūsā that, on the Day of Resurrection, Allah will present to every Muslim someone either who held onto Judaism or Christianity and say, ‘This is your ransom from the Fire.’
Theological commentary: The words “This is your ransom from the Fire” do not mean that the guilt or sins of a Muslim are unjustly transferred to another person. No soul bears the sin of another. Al-Nawawī explains that every person has a potential abode in Paradise and an abode in Hell; when the believer is admitted to Paradise by Allah’s mercy, the unbeliever occupies the place in Hell that he has earned through his own disbelief. The language of “ransom” describes the believer’s deliverance, not the reassignment of moral responsibility.
Likewise, “its punishment is inflicted by its own hands” refers principally to collective worldly chastisement through internal conflict, tribulations, upheaval, and bloodshed. It should not be understood as an absolute assertion that no sinful Muslim can ever experience punishment in the Hereafter. The detailed commentary in the attached study appropriately reads this narration alongside the fuller wordings of Abū Dāwūd, Aḥmad, and Muslim.
Editorial Note:
All five reports are genuine thulāthiyyāt in numerical structure: only three transmitters stand between Ibn Mājah and the Prophet ﷺ—Jubārah ibn al-Mughallis, Kathīr ibn Sulaym, and Anas ibn Mālik.
Their exceptionally short chains, however, do not indicate strength. Every one of the five shares the same severely defective route through Jubārah and Kathīr.