This Asad, too, was a subject of disagreement among the critics. He is included among the narrators discussed in Lisān al-Mīzān, where you will find the imams’ statements concerning him set out in detail. It states that some of them criticized him because he was one of the proponents of juristic opinion, while a number of scholars—including Aḥmad and Ibn Maʿīn—declared him trustworthy. There is also another report concerning him, through Aḥmad ibn Saʿīd ibn Abī Maryam, who said: “An inveterate liar; he is nothing.”

Al-Dhahabī indicated that this report should be rejected, perhaps because this Aḥmad ibn Saʿīd is unknown, for I have not found any biographical notice for him. In my view, it deserves to be rejected because it contradicts all the statements of the imams, both those who declared him trustworthy and those who declared him weak. As for those who declared him trustworthy, that is clear enough. As for those who declared him weak, most of them merely pronounced him weak without qualification; the others faulted him for poor retention, or because he narrated objectionable reports. Ibn ʿAdī, who came after them, concluded his biographical notice by saying: “He has many hadiths from the Kufans. I have not seen anything objectionable in his hadiths, and I hope that his hadith is sound. Among the proponents of juristic opinion after Abū Yūsuf, no one narrated more hadiths than he.”

I say: it is only fitting that someone who narrated as many hadiths as he did, with nothing objectionable found among them, should be trustworthy. If such a thing is found—as some have mentioned—its rarity makes it excusable. And Allah knows best.

In sum, this corroborating report renders the hadith authentic down to Mujālid ibn Saʿīd, though it still requires further support—and I have found it. Al-Ajlaḥ reported from al-Shaʿbī: “When Jaʿfar ibn Abī Ṭālib came from the land of Abyssinia, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, welcomed him, kissed him between the eyes, and drew him close to himself.” In another version: “and embraced him.” Ibn Saʿd recorded it (4/35), as did Ibn Abī Shaybah (12/106), and Abū Dāwūd recorded it through him (5220).

I say: this is a good mursal chain of transmission. Al-Ajlaḥ—namely, Ibn ʿAbd Allāh—was truthful; there is slight criticism of him, but it is not detrimental. For this reason, al-Dhahabī said in al-Mughnī: “A Shīʿī; there is no harm in his hadith, though some considered him weak.”