Abī Habīb; however, the scholars of transmission unanimously regard him as a liar, and none of them accepts his reports from Mālik. It has also been transmitted through another chain mentioned by Ibn Abd al-Barr, but that chain includes someone unknown to us.
Ahmad’s followers and others affiliated with the Sunnah and hadith differed regarding descent, coming, arrival, and similar matters: should these be said to involve movement and change of place, or to occur without movement and change of place? Or should one refrain from either affirmation or denial? There are “three views,” mentioned by Judge Abū Ya‘lā in his book “Differences between the Two Reports and the Two Opinions.”
The first is the view of Abū Abd Allāh ibn Hāmid and others.
The second is the view of Abū al-Hasan al-Tamīmī and his household.
The third is the view of Abū Abd Allāh ibn Battah and others.
Among these scholars, some refrain from affirming the wording while accepting the meaning. This is the view of many of them, as mentioned by Abū Umar ibn Abd al-Rahmān and others (*). Others refrain from affirming the meaning as well as the wording. As for their conception of the meaning, some conceive it in general terms, while others conceive it in detail, whether correctly or incorrectly.
Those who affirm this as a report from “Ahmad,” together with others affiliated with the Sunnah and hadith, hold two views concerning its interpretation: