and Ibn Ḥibbān, while the rest of its transmitters are relied upon in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.”

He meant Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, yet al-Bukhārī said of this Ḥabīb, “He is in need of further consideration.” Ibn ʿAdī said, “None of the texts of his hadiths are objectionable, though he did show inconsistency in the chains through which he reports. Nevertheless, Abū Ḥātim, Abū Dāwūd, and Ibn Ḥibbān declared him reliable, so his narrations are at the very least ḥasan, if Allah wills. Al-Ḥāfiẓ also said of him, ‘There is no harm in him.’ ”

The hadith is found in Musnad al-Ṭayālisī (no. 438): “Dāwūd al-Wāsiṭī—who was trustworthy—told us, ‘I heard Ḥabīb ibn Sālim relate it.’ ” However, a portion of its wording is missing here and must be supplied from Musnad Aḥmad.

Al-Haythamī states in Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid (5/189): “It was transmitted by Aḥmad, by al-Bazzār in a fuller form, and by al-Ṭabarānī in part of it in al-Awsaṭ, and its narrators are trustworthy.”

In my view, it is unlikely that the hadith refers to ʿUmar ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, because his caliphate was close in time to the era of the Rightly Guided Caliphs and did not come after two phases of rule—one biting and the other coercive. Allah knows best.