I say: It is as he—may Allah Most High have mercy on him—said. Yet this does not mean that the hadith cannot be authentically attributed to the Prophet, for the report attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas has the ruling of a report attributed to the Prophet, for two reasons:

First, it concerns Qur’anic exegesis, and whatever is of this nature has the ruling of a report attributed to the Prophet. This is why al-Hakim stipulated in his al-Mustadrak that he would include reports of exegesis from the Companions, as he mentioned therein (1/55).

Second, it has supporting reports attributed to the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—from a number of Companions: ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Umamah, Hisham ibn Hakim—or ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Qatadah al-Sulami, there being disagreement as to which of the two it is—Mu‘awiyah ibn Abi Sufyan, Abu al-Darda’, and Abu Musa. Although the chains of most of these reports are not free from criticism, some of them strengthen others. Indeed, Shaykh Salih al-Maqbali said in al-Abhath al-Musaddadah: “It is not far-fetched to claim mass transmission in meaning for the hadiths and reports concerning this matter” (1).

This is especially so since the righteous early generations among the Companions and the Successors accepted these reports—or the point on which they all agree, namely that the descendants were brought forth from Adam’s back and made to bear witness against themselves—without any disagreement among them. They include ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr, ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud, a number of the Companions, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, Salman al-Farisi, Muhammad ibn Ka‘b, al-Dahhak ibn Muzahim, al-Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah, Fatimah bint al-Husayn, Abu Ja‘far al-Baqir, and others.

Al-Hafiz al-Suyuti included these reports attributed to the Companions and those hadiths attributed to the Prophet in al-Durr al-Manthur (3/141–145). Some of them were also included by al-Shawkani in Fath al-Qadir (2/215–252), and before him by al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir (2/261–164). I traced the hadith of ‘Umar in al-Da‘ifah (3070), and judged it authentic on account of corroborating evidence in Takhrij Sharh al-Tahawiyyah (266). I likewise traced the hadith of Abu Hurayrah in my sourcing of Ibn Abi ‘Asim’s al-Sunnah (204 and 205—my edition), and also judged it authentic there (p. 267).

There is also, on this subject, a hadith attributed to the Prophet from Abu al-Darda’, which has previously appeared under no. 49, and one from Anas, which has previously appeared under no. 172. It was reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim, and is the most authentic of them. It states: