I say: Ibn ‘Adi’s remarks clearly indicate that the Prophet-attributed narration through Khalid ibn Tahman includes Habib ibn Abi Habib; thus, he regarded the omission as having come from the copyist. Ibn ‘Adi mentioned this in the biographical entry for Habib ibn Abi Habib, the dealer in patterned mats, but I do not think that he has any connection with this hadith, especially since he belonged to a later generation: he was among the Followers of the Followers and narrated from Qatadah and others. Rather, he is either Habib ibn Abi Habib al-Bajali, as is explicitly stated in al-Tirmidhi’s narration, or Habib ibn Abi Thabit, as in al-Tirmidhi’s narration and others. Yet Ibn ‘Adi’s version reads: “From Habib”—Abu Hafs said: “He was the shoemaker.” Perhaps “the shoemaker” was a byname for Habib ibn Abi Thabit according to Abu Hafs, who was ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali al-Fallas, the hadith master. This would then be a valuable point of information that they did not mention in Ibn Abi Thabit’s biographical entry. And Allah, Glorified and Exalted is He, knows best.

In sum, this hadith revolves around either Habib ibn Abi Thabit or Habib ibn Abi Habib, and both are trustworthy. The former, however, is better known and more reliable, though he practised concealment in transmission. Thus, if the hadith is his, its defect is concealment in transmission; but if it is the hadith of Ibn Abi Habib al-Bajali—as al-Bayhaqi decisively maintained, as will follow—then its defect is the memory confusion of Khalid ibn Tahman, who narrated it from him. Nevertheless, it is strengthened by Tu‘mah’s corroborating narration. Likewise, it is strengthened if the hadith is reliably preserved from both Habibs, as is plainly evident.

Secondly, al-Tirmidhi said: “Isma‘il ibn ‘Ayyash narrated this hadith from ‘Umarah ibn Ghaziyyah, from Anas ibn Malik, from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, with similar wording. This hadith is not preserved, and it is mursal; ‘Umarah ibn Ghaziyyah did not meet Anas ibn Malik.”