that their chains were disconnected and that Abd Allah had heard nothing from his father! He sought to support this—so he claimed—by Ahmad’s statement: “I do not know whether he heard from his father or not,” and by a remark he cited from al-Bukhari in his Tarikh (3/1/51), which is not explicit in denying that he heard from him (1). Therefore, we do not find any of the later hadith masters giving attention to this denial. Al-Dhahabi, for instance, said in al-Siyar (5/50): “The hadith master, the imam... He narrated extensively from his father...” In al-Kashif, he definitively affirmed his narration from his father and others, saying: “Trustworthy.” Al-Hafiz likewise said so in al-Taqrib. When al-Hafiz al-Ala'i included him in his book al-Marasil (252/338), he added nothing beyond: “From Umar, may Allah be pleased with him. Abu Zur'ah said: Mursal.”

I have become certain that this man is one of the people of caprice in his weakening of authentic hadiths, in opposition to the scholars specialized in this field—assuming that he knows that the evidence on which he relied to deny direct hearing is insufficient to establish the discontinuity he alleged, that he knows the position taken on the matter by the hadith masters mentioned above, and that he knows of other facts supporting them. Otherwise, he is an ignorant pretender to knowledge! Here, then, are such facts as have become available to me:

First: the imam of the hadith scholars, al-Bukhari, to whom this pretender attributed the denial of his having heard