al-Lisān, which shows that he is unanimously regarded as weak and that al-Ḥākim’s declaration of his reliability is not to be relied upon.

Yet the report is also transmitted by ʿUbayd Allah ibn ʿUmar from Nāfiʿ, providing a supporting chain.

Al-Dāraquṭnī recorded it, and from him it was taken by al-Ḍiyāʾ al-Maqdisī in al-Mukhtārah. Al-Ḥākim also recorded it, and al-Bayhaqī cited it through the route of Abū Yūsuf Yaʿqūb ibn Yūsuf al-Wāsiṭī, who said: “Shuʿayb ibn Ayyūb narrated to us; ʿAbd Allah ibn Numayr narrated to us; from ʿUbayd Allah ibn ʿUmar,” with the same chain. Al-Ḥākim ruled: “Authentic according to the criteria of the two Shaykhs, for Shuʿayb ibn Ayyūb is trustworthy and he has transmitted it with a connected chain,” and al-Dhahabī concurred.

I observe, however, that neither of the two Shaykhs actually narrates from Shuʿayb; he appears only among the transmitters of Abū Dāwūd. He is truthful but practices tadlīs, as Taqrīb states; nevertheless, he has given an explicit statement of transmission here, as you see. Thus the chain is sound—provided that his transmitter, Yaʿqūb ibn Yūsuf al-Wāsiṭī, is reliable, for I have found no mention of him in the biographical references available to me.

After quoting the report through both routes, al-Bayhaqī commented: “Ibn al-Mujbir is unique in the first chain, and Yaʿqūb ibn Yūsuf al-Khallāl in the second. The version that is widely known is that of the group—Hammād ibn Salamah, Zāʾidah ibn Qudāmah, Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd al-Qaṭṭān, and others—from ʿUbayd Allah, from Nāfiʿ, from Ibn ʿUmar, from ʿUmar as his own statement. It has also been narrated from Abū Hurayrah as a marfūʿ report, and Yaḥyā ibn Abī Kathīr relates it from Abū Qilābah from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him.”

I say: This, then, is another supporting narration, though it is mursal.