al-Saghir. It therefore appears to be in his al-Sunan al-Kubra, as is supported by the fact that al-Manawi stated that it is found in al-Nasa’i’s Tafsir; and the Tafsir is found only in his al-Kubra. In this, he followed al-Hafiz al-Mizzi in Tuhfat al-Ashraf (5/303).

The second observation concerns his definite assertion that al-Daraqutni preferred the report attributed to the Companion. Al-Diya al-Maqdisi quoted al-Daraqutni’s words at the end of the hadith. In sum, he said that the trustworthy narrators differed in their narrations from Ismaʿil: some attributed it to the Prophet, while others attributed it to the Companion. He then named those who attributed it to the Prophet, and their number came to twenty-two, whereas those who attributed it to the Companion numbered only four. Al-Daraqutni said: “All the narrators of this hadith are trustworthy. It seems that Qays ibn Abi Hazim would at times be more forthcoming in narrating it and attribute it to the Prophet, while at other times he would hesitate and stop it at Abu Bakr.”

Thus, as you can see, he did not prefer the report attributed to the Companion; rather, the apparent implication of his words is that he was more inclined to prefer the report attributed to the Prophet. This is correct, since those who attributed it to the Prophet were many times more numerous than those who stopped it at the Companion, as you have seen. This is especially so because al-Hafiz al-Mizzi noted that ʿImran ibn ʿUyaynah narrated a similar report from Bayan ibn Bishr, from Qays. This is a strong corroborating narration, for Bayan ibn Bishr was trustworthy and precise, and he agreed with Ismaʿil in attributing it to the Prophet. This shows that the original form of the hadith in his transmission was attributed to the Prophet, even if he sometimes stopped it at the Companion for the reason mentioned by al-Daraqutni or for another reason.

ʿImran ibn ʿUyaynah was truthful, though prone to errors. Although a narrator such as him cannot be relied upon as independent proof, he can at least be cited as corroboration. To be sure, Shuʿbah narrated it from al-Hakam, from Qays ibn Abi Hazim, from Abu Bakr, as a report attributed to the Companion. Al-Hakam—namely Ibn ʿUtaybah—though trustworthy and precise like Ismaʿil ibn Abi Khalid, is inferior to him in two respects:

First, he may at times have practised concealment in transmission, as stated in al-Taqrib.

Second, no one corroborated him in stopping the report at the Companion, unlike Ismaʿil, who was corroborated in attributing it to the Prophet, as mentioned above. Therefore, the latter is certainly the weightier view, Allah willing.