be the accurately preserved version, for ʿAmr ibn Dīnār narrated it from Abū al-Shaʿthāʾ, from Ibn ʿAbbās, with a meaning close to Mālik’s narration from Abū al-Zubayr.

I say:

There is no basis for preferring Abū al-Zubayr’s narration to that of Habīb ibn Abī Thābit. Habīb ibn Abī Thābit is among the narrators of both Sahīh collections, so his report has a stronger claim to preference than Abū al-Zubayr’s, since the latter is included only by Muslim. Moreover, differing versions of the text have been transmitted from Abū al-Zubayr, from Saʿīd ibn Jubayr: one places the incident during travel, as Qurrah narrated from him, agreeing with Abū al-Zubayr’s report from Abū al-Tufayl; another places it in Medina, as most narrators reported from him, from Saʿīd.

Thus, three reports have been transmitted from Abū al-Zubayr: Abū al-Tufayl’s report from Muʿādh about combining prayers during travel; Saʿīd ibn Jubayr’s similar report from Ibn ʿAbbās; and Saʿīd ibn Jubayr’s report from Ibn ʿAbbās mentioning the combining of prayers in Medina. They have accepted all these as authentic because Abū al-Zubayr had an excellent memory. Why, then, should Habīb ibn Abī Thābit’s report not also be established as authentically transmitted from Saʿīd ibn Jubayr, when Habīb is more reliable than Abū al-Zubayr?

The other authentic reports from Ibn ʿAbbās support what Habīb narrated, for the combining of prayers mentioned by Ibn ʿAbbās was not on account of rain. Moreover, his words “in Medina” indicate that it did not occur during travel. Thus, his statement, “He combined the prayers in Medina without fear or rain,” makes it all the more appropriate to say, “without fear or travel.”

As for the person who said, “I think it was because of rain,” this was merely his conjecture; it is not part of the hadith. Rather, assuming