and Abd al-Mun'im is a Basran shaykh.”

Al-Uqayli said: “No one corroborated him in it—that is, Abd al-Mun'im—and he is rejected in hadith; yet he was corroborated by someone even lower in standing than he.” Al-Bukhari likewise stated in al-Tarikh al-Saghir (204) that he was rejected in hadith. Al-Bayhaqi said: “A group narrated it in this manner from Abd al-Mun'im ibn Nu'aym Abu Sa'id. Al-Bukhari said: ‘He is rejected in hadith.’ Yahya ibn Muslim al-Bakka', the Kufan, was deemed weak by Yahya ibn Ma'in.”

Al-Bayhaqi seems, by his words “in this manner...,” to be indicating that this group was contradicted—and such is indeed the case. Al-Hakim recorded it (1/204) through Ali ibn Hammad ibn Abi Talib, who said: Abd al-Mun'im ibn Nu'aym al-Riyahi narrated to us; Amr ibn Fa'id al-Aswari narrated to us; Yahya ibn Muslim narrated to us, with the same chain. Thus, he inserted Amr ibn Fa'id between Abd al-Mun'im and Yahya ibn Muslim. He then said: “There is no narrator impugned in its chain of transmission besides Amr ibn Fa'id; the rest are shaykhs of Basra. This is an unfamiliar Sunnah report, for which I know of no chain of transmission other than this.”

Al-Dhahabi criticized him, saying: “I say: Al-Daraqutni said: ‘Amr ibn Fa'id is abandoned.’”

I say: Both of them overlooked the fact that it also contains Abd al-Mun'im, who is very weak, as is indicated by al-Bukhari’s preceding statement: “rejected in hadith.” Al-Dhahabi said in al-Du'afa' wa al-Matrukin: “Al-Daraqutni and others declared him weak.” Then I saw that al-Hafiz al-Iraqi, in Takhrij al-Ihya' (1/157), had criticized al-Hakim in much the same manner as we have mentioned.