al-Hakim, rather than the majority of scholars. It has been reported that he defined the anomalous hadith as: “That which a trustworthy narrator transmits alone and for which there is no corroborating report.” This differs from the statement of Imam al-Shafi‘i: “It is when a trustworthy narrator relates a hadith that conflicts with what people have narrated. It is not when he relates something that no one else has related.”

This is the position held by the majority of scholars, both early and later; whatever differs from it is anomalous. Remarkably, al-Hakim’s preceding definition of an anomalous hadith would entail rejecting hundreds of authentic hadiths, especially those found in his own work, al-Mustadrak!

707 — “David was the most devout of all people.”

Al-Tirmidhi (2/262) and al-Hakim (2/433) related it through the route of ‘Abdullah ibn Rabi‘ah al-Dimashqi, who said: ‘A’idh Allah Abu Idris al-Khawlani narrated to me from Abu al-Darda, who said: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said it.

Al-Tirmidhi said: “Good and singular.” Al-Hakim said: “Its chain of transmission is authentic.” Al-Dhahabi rejected this, saying: “I say: Rather, Ahmad said concerning this ‘Abdullah: ‘His hadiths are fabricated.’”

I say: He is ‘Abdullah ibn Rabi‘ah ibn Yazid. In al-Mustadrak, his name appears as “‘Abdullah ibn Yazid,” ascribed to his grandfather; while some reversed it and said: “‘Abdullah ibn Yazid ibn Rabi‘ah.” He is unknown, as al-Hafiz stated in al-Taqrib. I have not seen anyone cite the aforementioned statement of Ahmad in his biography—not even al-Dhahabi. Rather, he mentioned it in al-Mizan under the biography of ‘Abdullah ibn Yazid ibn Adam al-Dimashqi, who narrated from Wathilah and Abu Umamah. As you can see, this is not the narrator under discussion, for he belongs to an earlier generation than the latter; this one