and ‘Abd al-Razzaq in al-Musannaf (11/341/20711), Ibn Abi Shaybah (15/8/18960, 18961, and 18980), Ahmad (5/386–387, 403, 404, and 406), and al-Hakim (4/432–433), through various routes from him. Some of them, however, named him Khalid ibn Khalid al-Yashkuri. He was trustworthy: Ibn Hibban and al-‘Ijli declared him trustworthy, and a number of trustworthy narrators reported from him. Thus, al-Hafiz’s designation of him as “acceptable” is itself unacceptable. Therefore, when al-Hakim said after the hadith, “Its chain of transmission is authentic,” al-Dhahabi concurred with him.

As for the statement of Shaykh al-Kashmiri in al-Tasrih bima Tawātara fi Nuzul al-Masih, after attributing it (p. 210) to Ibn Abi Shaybah and Ibn ‘Asakir—“Some of its wording coincides with what is found in al-Bukhari, so it is strong, Allah Most High willing”—it carries no weight among those familiar with the methods of authentication and weakening. For the coincidence of some of its wording with that found in al-Bukhari does not entail strengthening the hadith in its entirety. Indeed, the opposite may often be the case; this is known among them as an anomalous or rejected hadith. Reference to one such wording will follow shortly.

I have cited many examples of this in al-Da‘ifah, which anyone wishing to verify the matter may seek out in its printed volumes. Its twelfth volume contains many other examples, under nos. 5513, 5514, 5527, 5542, 5543, 5544, 5547, 5552, 5553, and 5554.

Similar is the statement of Shaykh ‘Abd Allah al-Ghumari in The Creed of the Muslims Regarding the Descent of Jesus, Peace Be Upon Him (p. 102), which Shaykh Abu Ghuddah quoted in his annotation to al-Tasrih: “It is an authentic hadith!” I say: This too has no value, for it is merely an assertion that anyone can make, however ignorant he may be of this noble science. I have found this al-Ghumari to be exceedingly liberal in declaring authentic hadiths that are not