of ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn Ṣuhayb, from Anas, that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, had a handkerchief or a piece of cloth with which he would wipe his face after performing ablution?” He replied: “It was in a small notebook, but Ibn ʿUlayyah took it, so I do not narrate it.”

Al-Bayhaqī said: “Had ʿAbd al-Wārith narrated it from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, from Anas, it would have been a sound chain of transmission, except that he declined to narrate it. It is possible, however, that he only possessed it through the first chain. And Allah knows best.”

Ibn Abī Ḥātim cited the hadith of ʿAbd al-Wārith from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz in al-ʿIlal (1/19) and considered it defective because it was attributed to the Companion. He said: “My father said: I saw in some narrations from ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz that Anas ibn Mālik had a piece of cloth. The version attributed to the Companion is more likely, and it cannot plausibly be Prophetic in attribution.”

The hadith has a supporting narration through Rushdayn ibn Saʿd, from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ziyād ibn Anʿam, from ʿUtbah ibn Ḥumayd, from ʿUbādah ibn Nusayy, from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ghanm, from Muʿādh ibn Jabal, who said: “I saw the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, wipe his face with the edge of his garment after performing ablution.”

It was reported by al-Tirmidhī (1/75–76) and al-Bayhaqī (1/236), who said: “Its chain of transmission is not strong.” Al-Tirmidhī explained its defect, saying: “It is a singular hadith, and its chain of transmission is weak. Rushdayn ibn Saʿd and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ziyād ibn Anʿam al-Ifrīqī are deemed weak in hadith transmission.”

I say: Their weakness is only on account of their retention, not because either of them was accused of any flaw in integrity. Thus, reports from transmitters like them may be used as supporting evidence. In my view, therefore, the hadith is good by virtue of its combined chains. Shaykh Aḥmad Shākir made the curious judgment of declaring the chain of the hadith of ʿĀʾishah sound, because he agreed with al-Ḥākim that Abū Muʿādh was al-Fuḍayl ibn Maysarah; yet you have already seen his error in that. Likewise, he graded the hadith of Muʿādh ibn Jabal as good, contrary to al-Tirmidhī and al-Bayhaqī. This was an unpraiseworthy leniency on his part. And Allah knows best.