Silsilat al-Ahadith al-SahihahNasir al-Din al-Albani
  1. Al-Hakam, from Husayn, from Zayd ibn Wahb, from Hudhayfah.

It appears to me—and Allah knows best—that this discrepancy is a matter of variation in transmission, not contradiction, and that all of these reports are authentic and established from Zayd ibn Wahb. This is because all their narrators are trustworthy preservers, against whom no criticism or aspersion may be made; and because Zayd was a leading Successor and a mukhadram—one who had lived through both the pre-Islamic and Islamic periods. It is mentioned that he set out to travel to the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, but the Prophet died while he was on the way. Moreover, he was an eminent and trustworthy narrator, to the extent that al-A‘mash, who narrated the first version from him, said: “When Zayd ibn Wahb reports to you from someone, it is as though you heard it from the person from whom he reports.”

He met a number of the senior Companions and narrated from them, including ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him. Thus, it is not unlikely that someone of his standing heard this hadith from the three Companions mentioned in those versions: ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Hasana; Thabit ibn Wada‘ah—at times directly from him, and at other times through al-Bara’; and Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman. It is often the case that a narrator with strong retention narrates through an intermediary from one of his shaykhs, then later has the opportunity to meet that shaykh and hear directly from him what he had previously heard from him through an intermediary. This is well known to those engaged in this noble field of knowledge.

In my view, affirming the soundness of all these versions is preferable to giving precedence to one version over another, since there is no basis for preferring one over the other even if contradiction is assumed. This is unlike al-Bukhari’s statement following the hadith: “Thabit’s hadith is sounder, though there is something to consider in the hadith itself. Ibn ‘Umar reported from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him: ‘I neither eat it nor declare it unlawful.’”

I say: This hadith of Ibn ‘Umar is authentic, reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim, and Muslim narrated it

٤ - الحكم عن حصين عن زيد بن وهب عن حذيفة. ويبدو لي - والله أعلم - أن هذا الاختلاف هو من باب اختلاف التنوع لا التضاد، وأن هذه كلها صحيحة ثابتة عن زيد بن وهب، وذلك لأن كل رواته من الثقات الحفاظ لا مطعن فيهم ولا مغمز، ولأن زيدا هذا من كبار التابعين المخضرمين، وقد ذكروا أنه رحل إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم، فقبض وهو في الطريق، وهو إلى ذلك ثقة جليل، حتى قال الأعمش راوي الوجه الأول عنه: " إذا حدثك زيد بن وهب عن أحد فكأنك سمعته من الذي حدثك عنه ". وقد لقي جماعة من كبار الصحابة وروى عنهم مثل عمر رضي الله عنه، فلا يستبعد عن مثله أن يكون سمع الحديث من الصحابة الثلاثة المذكورين في تلك الوجوه: عبد الرحمن بن حسنة. ثابت بن وداعة. تارة عنه مباشرة، وتارة بواسطة البراء. حذيفة بن اليمان. وكثيرا ما يحدث الراوي الحافظ بالواسطة عن شيخ له، ثم يتيسر له الاتصال بشيخه، والسماع منه مباشرة لما كان سمعه من قبل بالواسطة عنه. وهذا أمر معروف عند المشتغلين بهذا العلم الشريف. والقول بصحة هذه الوجوه أولى عندي من ترجيح وجه منها على وجه، لعدم وجود المرجح على افتراض التعارض، مثل قول البخاري ﵀ عقب الحديث: " وحديث ثابت أصح، وفي نفس الحديث نظر، قال ابن عمر عن النبي ﷺ: لا آكله ولا أحرمه ". وأقول: حديث ابن عمر هذا صحيح متفق عليه بين الشيخين، ورواه مسلم

Company

  • About
  • Pricing
  • Why Translate?

Support

  • Contact us
  • Report a bug
  • Support us
  • Donate
  • AI combat arena

Follow us

© 2026 Kutub. All rights reserved.
Terms and conditionsPrivacy policyCookies