his Ṣaḥīḥ (1), citing a number of leading Imams, and concludes (2) that listening to the shaykh’s own wording and reading the text back to him are—so far as authenticity and evidentiary strength are concerned (3)—equivalent. Allah knows best.

[The Meaning of inbāʾ]
Linguistically (4) and in the usage of the early scholars, inbāʾ means the same as ikhbār (reporting). Among the later scholars, however, it refers to an ijāza (5), just as the particle ʿan does, for (6) in their convention it likewise signifies an ijāza (7).

[Does a Contemporary’s ʿanʿana Imply Hearing?]
The ʿanʿana of a contemporary narrator is carried on the presumption of direct hearing, unlike that of a non-contemporary, which is treated as mursal or munqaṭiʿ. The condition (8) for construing it as based on hearing is the verification of contemporaneity—except in the case of a mudallis (9), for his ʿanʿana is not presumed to indicate hearing.

Others have said that, for a contemporary’s ʿanʿana to be regarded as hearing, it must be proven that the shaykh and the narrator actually met, even if only once, so that (10) one may be assured (11) that the remainder of his ʿanʿana is not of the mursal type.