and to Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Mardawayh, Ibn Khuzaymah, al-Daraqutni in al-Afrad, and Abu Nasr al-Sijzi. Al-Suyuti remained silent about it, as was generally his habit, and I think it can only be through this route. This is supported by the fact that al-Hafiz Ibn Kathir mentioned it in al-Tarikh (2/51), through Ibn Khuzaymah’s and al-Daraqutni’s narration by this route, and said: “Then Ibn Khuzaymah said: ‘It does not meet our criteria.’” I say: Regarding Ibn Jud'an, he said: “I do not cite him as evidence because of his poor memory.”

In sum, this hadith is unquestionably authentic, at least when all its routes are considered together, since most of them are not severely weak. Indeed, some of them are authentic in themselves according to al-Bazzar and others, from Ibn 'Amr. Thus, al-Nawawi’s declaring it weak is untenable, as is Ibn Kathir’s finding defect in some of its routes in al-Tarikh and al-Tafsir (1/361 and 3/113–114), for he did not come across most of the routes I have mentioned, especially al-Bazzar’s route. Therefore, no attention should be paid to what he related from Qadi 'Iyad in explaining Allah Most High’s description of John as “chaste,” which suggests that he rejected this hadith. And Allah, Glorified and Exalted, knows best.

By way of further benefit, I add: As for the hadith of Abu Umamah, attributed to the Prophet, with the wording: “Four are cursed in this world and the Hereafter ...,” he mentioned them, the fourth being: “A sexually abstinent man; and Allah made no man sexually abstinent except John, son of Zachariah.” It is a rejected hadith with a very weak chain of transmission. I have traced it in Ghayat al-Maram, no. 89. Al-Alusi remained silent about it in his Tafsir (2/148)—how excellent!