“It was narrated by Aḥmad, and its chain contains an unnamed man, while the rest of its narrators are trustworthy.”

I say: Al-Bayhaqī likewise transmitted it (6/155) through another route from Hushaym, with the same wording. He then said:

“We have recorded it through the ḥadīth of Musaddad, from Hushaym: ʿAwf informed us; Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn related to us from Abū Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said”—and he mentioned it. “Abū al-Ḥasan al-Muqriʾ informed us ...”

He then cited the chain to Musaddad for it. Musaddad is trustworthy and is among al-Bukhārī’s narrators, but the chain leading to him contains someone whom I have not identified. Al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Zaylaʿī, in Naṣb al-Rāyah (4/292), did not address this route, nor did al-Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿAsqalānī in al-Talkhīṣ (p. 256). And Allah knows best.

The ḥadīth also has a supporting report, narrated from ʿAbd Allah ibn Mughaffal as a Prophetic report, with the wording:

“Whoever digs a well is entitled to forty cubits as a watering-place for his livestock.”

It was narrated by al-Dārimī (2/273) and Ibn Mājah (2/96) through Ismāʿīl ibn Muslim al-Makkī, from al-Ḥasan, from him.

This chain is weak and has two defects:

The first is al-Ḥasan’s use of an ambiguous ‘from’ formula; he was al-Baṣrī and practised tadlīs.

The other is the weakness of Ismāʿīl ibn Muslim al-Makkī. Al-Ḥāfiẓ said in al-Taqrīb:

“He was a jurist, but weak in ḥadīth.”

And in al-Talkhīṣ (256), after attributing it to Ibn Mājah alone, he said:

“Its chain contains Ismāʿīl ibn Muslim, who is weak. Al-Ṭabarānī has also narrated it through Ashʿath, from al-Ḥasan. There is also a report on this subject from Abū Hurayrah in Aḥmad.”

I say: Since Ashʿath has corroborated him, then declaring the ḥadīth defective on account of the first defect is more warranted, as is clear. This Ashʿath is one of four men, all of whom narrate from al-Ḥasan: