Under his heading “The narrations that explicitly state the obligation to execute the one who abandons the prayer,” he writes:

“1 – From Ibn ʿAbbās, on the authority of the Prophet ﷺ: ‘The bonds of Islam and the foundations of the religion are three upon which Islam is built. Whoever abandons any one of them is a disbeliever whose blood is lawful: bearing witness that there is no god but Allah, the prescribed prayer, and fasting during Ramadan.’ Abu Yaʿlā related it with a ḥasan chain.”

I say: I harbor great doubt that this ḥadīth is authentically traceable to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. The compiler ruled it ḥasan only by following al-Munadhirī. I wrote in my own commentary on it the following:

“Al-Haythamī said likewise in al-Majmaʿ, 1/48. I remarked: There is room for scrutiny here, for the report comes through ʿAmr ibn Mālik al-Nakari, and only Ibn Ḥibbān declared him trustworthy. Yet even Ibn Ḥibbān said of him, ‘He errs and narrates singular reports,’ and he also said, ‘His ḥadīths are to be considered only when transmitted other than by his son.’ All of this indicates that what he narrates alone is not accepted as evidence. Hence you will realize that al-Dhahabī’s statement—quoted by al-Manāwī from his book al-Kabāʾir—‘This ḥadīth is ṣaḥīḥ,’ is incorrect. And if the report were sound at all, it would most likely be mawqūf—a statement of Ibn ʿAbbās himself—especially since one of its transmitters, Ḥammād ibn Zayd, expressed uncertainty, saying, ‘I do not think except that he raised it.’ His brother Saʿīd ibn Zayd asserted it was marfūʿ, but he is not a proof, as al-Saʿdī said, and al-Nasāʾī and others judged him ‘not strong.’ Allah knows best.”

I add here: Reliance on Ibn Ḥibbān’s sole authentication of a narrator is not dependable, as we clarified in the Introduction. That is when he merely declares the narrator trustworthy—so what should be said when he also concedes that the man “makes mistakes”?