I say: The answer to this is very easy—though I do not know how it escaped the attention of the esteemed Shaykh. Among the known motives that lead a narrator to practise concealment in transmission is that he may narrate from someone younger than himself—as is the case when senior narrators transmit from juniors—and omit him either out of a desire for a shorter chain of transmission, or because he knows that the person’s transmissions are unacceptable to hadith scholars. Both factors apply to Ibn Abī Yaḥyā. So why should the Shaykh find it strange—indeed, objectionable—that ʿAbbād concealed him, and then his teacher Dāwūd, who was also weak?

Can something like this refute the imams’ accusation that he practised concealment in transmission? Can they then be charged with committing a grave error—an accusation passed down by later generations from earlier ones—until the Shaykh came and charged them with it without proof? Rather, he merely objects to what is found in numerous reports: senior narrators transmitting from juniors, and a shaykh omitting his own pupil, even though that pupil is his source for a particular hadith—as is the case here, as we have explained.

As for his statement, “These are statements which give the impression of concealment in transmission,” the answer is twofold:

First, among the statements establishing concealment in transmission is Imam Aḥmad’s remark: “He practised concealment in transmission.” As you can see, this explicitly affirms concealment in transmission. Consequently, the Shaykh did not even mention it, let alone answer it.

Second, what the Shaykh cited from Abū Ḥātim plainly charges ʿAbbād with concealment in transmission: “We believe that he took these hadiths from Ibn Abī Yaḥyā …” If the Shaykh rejects this on the grounds that Abū Ḥātim did not state it categorically, since he said, “We believe,” then the answer is that there is no difference between this and Shaykh Aḥmad’s own statement, a few words earlier: “We do not deem them sound,” as previously quoted from him. Our decisive response is that the considered judgment of a specialist scholar in his field constitutes evidence against one who is not a specialist and may not be rejected except on the basis of stronger evidence. So where is it?

Similar to Abū Ḥātim’s statement is that of Yaḥyā ibn Saʿīd: “I said to ʿAbbād, ‘Did you hear the hadith … from