“A trustworthy Successor.” Al-Ḥāfiẓ likewise said that he was trustworthy.

I say: The rest of the narrators in the chain are well-known and trustworthy, so the chain is good and contains no hidden defect. Thus, the statement of Ibn Abī Ḥātim in al-ʿIlal (2/308), reporting from his father—“This is a rejected hadith”—is untenable. Likewise untenable is what al-Manāwī related from Ibn al-Qayyim, who said: “It is a defective hadith. Al-Tirmidhī narrated it and mentioned its defect. At present, I do not recall what was said about it, except that it is narrated by ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muslim ibn Jundab, from his father, from Ibn ʿUmar.”

I say: This too is untenable, since it is merely an assertion. Al-Manāwī then said: “Ibn Ḥibbān said: ‘Its chain is good, though it does not meet al-Bukhārī’s criteria.’”

Note: The name ʿAbd Allāh is omitted from Ibn Ḥibbān’s version, which reads: “Muslim ibn Jundab, from his father, from Ibn ʿUmar ...” This omission is not due to a copyist; rather, this is how the report came to him. For he cited it in the biography of Jundab ibn Salamah and said: “He is also called Ibn Salām, a Medinan. He narrated from Ibn ʿUmar, and Muslim ibn Jundab narrated from him.” He then cited the hadith. There is no doubt that this version is anomalous, since it contradicts the other narrations, which unanimously state that it is narrated by ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muslim, from his father, from Ibn ʿUmar, with no mention of Jundab in them. And Allah knows best.

I have found another chain for the hadith from Ibn ʿUmar. Al-Rūyānī said in his Musnad (fol. 249/2): Al-ʿAbbās ibn Muḥammad informed us; Abū al-Rabīʿ Sulaymān ibn Dāwūd ibn Rashīd informed us; Khālid ibn Ziyād al-Dimashqī informed us, from Zuhayr ibn Muḥammad al-Makkī, from Nāfiʿ, from Ibn ʿUmar, who narrated it.

Its narrators are trustworthy, apart from this Khālid, who is unknown. Zuhayr ibn Muḥammad was Abū al-Mundhir al-Tamīmī al-Khurāsānī. Al-Ḥāfiẓ said: