Here, two slips made by some eminent scholars must be pointed out. Majd al-Dīn, in al-Muntaqā, cited the ḥadith in these very words and said: “It was narrated by Aḥmad and al-Tirmidhī, and al-Tirmidhī declared it authentic.” Al-Shawkānī added: “Aḥmad transmitted it with a sound isnād, and others have transmitted it with good chains.”

I say: the first error is attributing it to al-Tirmidhī, for we have not located it in his Sunan, nor did al-Nābulusī mention it in al-Dhakhāʾir. The second is the claim that Aḥmad’s chain is sound; it is in fact neither sound nor even hasan. How could it be so when it contains tadlīs (concealed transmission), interruption, and unknown narrators?

True, there is a strong corroborating report with Aḥmad: “Yaʿqūb narrated to us; my father narrated to us from Abū Isḥāq”—so in the manuscript, but the correct reading is Ibn Isḥāq—“he said: ʿAmr”—written with a wāw, whereas the correct form is ʿUmar, without the wāw—“ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUrwah ibn al-Zubayr, from his grandfather ʿUrwah, from someone who related it to him among the Companions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, who said:

‘The Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to command us to establish mosques in our homes, to perfect their workmanship, and to purify them.’”

This isnād is hasan: its transmitters are reliable, the very transmitters relied upon by the two Shaykhs, except for Ibn Isḥāq—and he is trustworthy and has explicitly stated that he heard the report. As for al-Haythamī’s remark, “Aḥmad narrated it with a sound chain,” it involves a certain degree of leniency.

Concerning his phrase “al-dūr” (the houses), Ibn Ḥazm said: