“My grandfather brought my father to the Messenger of Allah—peace and blessings be upon him—and said, ‘This is my son; what should I name him?’ He replied, ‘Name him after the person dearest to me: Hamzah ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib.’”

Al-Ḥākim deemed it defective, saying: “This unknown narrator is alone in transmitting this hadith from Ibn ʿUyaynah, whereas the correct version is that of Yaʿqūb ibn Ḥumayd. Abū Aḥmad the hadith master used to argue with me that al-Bukhārī narrated from him in al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaḥīḥ, but I would not accept this from him.”

I say: Al-Ḥāfiẓ mentioned in al-Tahdhīb the origin of the disagreement to which al-Ḥākim alluded, and he inclined to concur with Abū Aḥmad the hadith master—namely, al-Ḥākim, the author of Kitāb al-Kunā. Al-Dhahabī had preceded him in this in al-Kāshif. Whether this view or the other is correct, the narrator is of middling standing, and his hadith may be used as evidence.

Yet Yūsuf ibn Salmān, who differed with him in both the chain of transmission and the text, still requires consideration. As for the chain, he said, in place of “Jābir”: “...a man... My grandfather brought my father...” As for the text, he said “people” in place of “names.” This is perhaps the more likely wording, since it is related in the two Ṣaḥīḥs: “The person dearest to me is ʿĀʾishah, and among men, her father.” The hadiths that contradict this contain weakness, as I have explained in al-Ḍaʿīfah (1844 and 1843).

A number of hadith masters narrated from this Yūsuf, including al-Tirmidhī, al-Nasāʾī, Ibn Khuzaymah, and others. Ibn Ḥibbān and Maslamah declared him trustworthy, while al-Nasāʾī said: “There is no harm in him.” Thus, there is no basis for al-Ḥākim to declare him unknown—especially when he declares trustworthy narrators far less renowned than him.

Furthermore, his statement, “after the dearest of names to me,” was made before he was inspired with the hadith: “The names most beloved to Allah are ʿAbd Allāh and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān.” This has preceded under (904 and 1040) and in al-Irwāʾ (1176).