“He was a leading authority in syntax and the Arabic language and was prolific in ḥadīth. Ibrāhīm ibn Arūmah said, ‘Yaḥyā is among the trustworthy,’ and he noted that the latter was born in the year 165 AH, during the caliphate of al-Mahdī. Among the finest of his narrations is …”

I say: After this, Abū Shaykh went on to cite three ḥadīths from him; the one under discussion is the first of those three.

As for Isḥāq ibn Muḥammad ibn Ḥakīm, he is Isḥāq ibn Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm ibn Ḥakīm. Abū Shaykh (267) said:

“A truthful shaykh, skilled in literature and well-versed in ḥadīth. He possessed the compilations of Abū ʿUbaydah and ʿAbd al-Razzāq and transmitted abundantly. He was truthful and trustworthy and would narrate only from his written copies. He died in the year 312 AH.”

I say: It is remarkable that this ḥadīth escaped al-Suyūṭī in his al-Jāmiʿ al-Kabīr, so he did not include it there, even though he did cite it in al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaghīr through the route of al-Daylamī from Ibn ʿUmar, as though correcting the omission. Yet this lofty source—Tārīkh Iṣfahān—was missed by him, and likewise by his commentator al-Manāwī, who, in critiquing al-Daylamī’s chain, said:

“In it are narrators who are unknown.”

I say: Either al-Daylamī’s chain is different from that of Abū Shaykh, or it is actually the same chain but some of its transmitters were hidden from him because they are given no biographical notice outside this Tārīkh. The latter seems more likely to me, and Allah knows best.

In short, this ḥadīth is one of those rare gems that cannot be found in any other work with so elevated a chain and such meticulous verification. All praise is due to Allah, and He is the One who grants success.