In sum, the hadith is authentic through Sālim’s narration from Sabrah, may Allah be pleased with him. It was authenticated by those previously mentioned; Ibn Kathīr cited it as evidence in his Tafsīr (2/204), and Ibn al-Qayyim presented it in Ighāthat al-Lahfān as an established fact. As for the commentator on it, Ibn ʿAbd al-Mannān—who specializes in declaring authentic hadiths weak—he stated categorically in his comment (1/134) that its chain is weak, thereby opposing all those we have mentioned who authenticated it and cited it as evidence. His reason was that Sālim ibn Abī al-Jaʿd did not explicitly state that he heard it from Sabrah. In this, he clung to the view held by al-Bukhārī and others: that mere contemporaneity is insufficient to establish the continuity of a hadith or chain expressed as “so-and-so from so-and-so”; rather, it must be established that they met, even if only once. This differs from Muslim and others, who regard contemporaneity as sufficient.

In fact, this issue is among the most difficult, which is why the scholars’ statements concerning it—even those of a single scholar—have differed so greatly. Some side with al-Bukhārī, while others side with Muslim. The latter clearly set out his perspective and discussed it at length, responding to his opponent in such a comprehensive manner as to leave no room for doubt concerning the soundness of his position. He did so in the introduction to his Ṣaḥīḥ. Just as he differed with his shaykh on this question, scholars after them likewise differed over it, some supporting and others opposing, as is explained in the books on hadith methodology under the discussion of the chain expressed as “so-and-so from so-and-so.”

Because of the subtlety of this issue, I noted that Imam al-Nawawī, who defended the view of Imam al-Bukhārī in the introduction to his commentary on Muslim, adopted the position of Imam Muslim in some of his books on hadith methodology. Thus, in explaining the chain expressed as “so-and-so from so-and-so” in his al-Taqrīb, he said: “... It is ‘so-and-so from so-and-so.’ It has been said that it is mursal. But the correct view, upon which practice rests and which is held by the majority of hadith scholars, jurists, and scholars of legal theory, is that it has a continuous chain, provided that the narrator using the phrase ‘from’ is not practising tadlīs, and provided that it was possible for the narrators to have met one another. There is, however, disagreement over requiring proof that they met, extended companionship, and knowledge that he narrated from him ...”