objectionable reports.” Ibn ‘Adī then cited several such reports from him, but they were transmitted from him by Ahmad ibn Dāwūd Abū Sālih (1), whom al-Dāraqutnī declared a liar. The fault in these reports lies with him (2).

The third chain (3) for Jābir’s hadith includes Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhāb, whose identity and standing require investigation. He narrates from Muhammad ibn Muslim. If this is al-Tā’ifī, Ibn Ma‘īn regarded him as trustworthy, while Imam Ahmad regarded him as weak. Ibn Hazm said (4): “He is utterly unreliable.” I have not seen anyone else use this description of him; Muslim cited his narrations as supporting evidence. Ibn Hazm said (5): “If he is someone else, I do not know who he is.” I say: He is not someone else; he is certainly al-Tā’ifī (6).

In any event, even if this report from Jābir were authentic, it would be treated in the same way as the reports from ‘Ā’ishah and Ibn ‘Umar. All the other trustworthy narrators merely said: “He pronounced the talbiyah for Hajj.” Perhaps these narrators rendered what they understood to be its meaning, saying: “He performed Hajj alone.” It is well known that when ‘umrah is incorporated into Hajj, someone who says, “He pronounced the talbiyah for Hajj,” does not contradict someone who says, “He pronounced the talbiyah for both.” Rather, the latter gave the details (7), while the former spoke in general terms. The statement “He performed Hajj alone” admits the three interpretations we have mentioned.