= And he was followed in narrating it as mursal by: 1. Yazid ibn Harun. 2. Muhammad ibn Kathir. Both transmitted it from Hammad ibn Salama with a disconnected chain. Abu Nuaym recorded the report in Maʿrifat al-Sahaba (2/1116–1117), and Abu Shaykh in al-Sabaq, as will be cited shortly. In contrast, ʿAbd Allah ibn Yazid al-Muqri and Hafs ibn ʿUmar connected the chain and counted it among the musnad traditions of Ibn ʿAbbas. Abu Shaykh al-Asbahani produced this version in al-Sabaq wa-al-Rami, as quoted in Ibn Muflih’s al-Furuʿ (4/461) and elsewhere, and al-Khatib related it in al-Muʾtalif wa-al-Mukhtalif, as reproduced in Ibn Hajar’s al-Isaba (6/340). The hadith in its marfuʿ form was declared sound by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya, who said, “Its isnad is good,” and by Ibn al-Qayyim, as will be noted shortly. Al-Bayhaqi and Ibn Hajar, however, judged it weak; see al-Talkhis (4/180) and al-Bayhaqi’s al-Sunan al-Kubra (10/18). I maintain that the mursal version is nearer to the truth. As for the connected route, Ibn Hajar weakened Abu Shaykh’s chain, and in the second route cited by al-Khatib in al-Muʾtalif there are peculiar statements—such as that he possessed three hundred sheep and that each time he threw him down he gave him one hundred—indicating unreliable transmission. Allah knows best. Note: The chain “Muhammad ibn Kathir, from Hammad, from ʿAmr, from Saʿid ibn Jubayr, that the Prophet passed by Yazid ibn Rukana …” is mursal, for Saʿid ibn Jubayr did not meet Yazid ibn Rukana. (1) The Za manuscript reads: “or Rukana.”