makes errors. If Muslim narrated reports from him that others corroborated, it does not follow that he must narrate reports transmitted by him alone. Moreover, it is not known whether he heard from Ibrāhīm, whether Ibrāhīm heard from Fātima, or whether Fātima heard from Asmā’.

For this hadith to be established as authentic, each of these narrators must be known to be upright and accurate in transmission, and to have heard directly from the narrator before him. This is not known. The compilers of the authoritative collections—such as the Sahīh and Sunan collections—did not transmit reports from this Ibrāhīm, nor is he mentioned in these books, unlike Fātima bint al-Husayn, whose hadith transmission is known. How, then, can a hadith like this be relied upon as evidence? This is why none of the recognized hadith scholars narrated it in the authoritative collections.

The fact that a man’s father enjoys great standing does not necessarily make him one of the scholars who can be trusted in what they transmit from the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Asmā’ bint ‘Umays was married to Ja‘far, then Abū Bakr married her, and then ‘Alī married her. She had a child by each [of] (1) these men. Her children loved ‘Alī, yet none of them narrated this report from Asmā’. Muhammad ibn Abī Bakr, who was raised in ‘Alī’s care, was her son. His love for ‘Alī is well known, yet he did not narrate this from her.

Furthermore, Asmā’ was the wife of Ja‘far ibn Abī Tālib and was with him in Abyssinia. She only arrived with him after the conquest of Khaybar. This incident is said to have occurred at Khaybar; if it is authentic, it must therefore have occurred after the conquest of Khaybar. Among those present at Khaybar with the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—were the people of al-Hudaybiyya: 1,400 in number,