Thirdly, had his use here of an ambiguous “from” formula been a hidden defect, Abū Ḥātim himself would have invoked it when he cited this hadith in his book al-ʿIlal (Hidden Defects). In fact, he declared it defective on another ground—a ground which, Allah willing, is not disqualifying, as I shall soon explain, by Allah Most High’s permission. It is thus established beyond doubt that the chain of transmission is authentic. All praise is due to Allah.

Perhaps for this reason al-Ḍiyāʾ al-Maqdisī included it in al-Aḥādīth al-Mukhtārah (The Selected Hadiths), as I mentioned in Ṣifat al-Ṣalāh (The Description of the Prayer). This is likewise the direction indicated by Shaykh Aḥmad Shākir’s remarks—may Allah have mercy on him—in his aforementioned commentary on al-Tirmidhī.

Al-Tirmidhī’s limiting himself to classifying it as fair does not cast doubt upon this authentication. In my view, this was only because he feared that Abū Aḥmad al-Zubayrī had erred in narrating the hadith from Sufyān. But now that ʿAbd al-Razzāq has corroborated him, as I noted earlier, the difficulty has vanished. All praise is due to Allah.

As for the ground on which Abū Ḥātim declared it defective, it is found in his son’s al-ʿIlal (1/105):

“I asked my father about a hadith narrated by Abū al-Aḥwaṣ from Abū Isḥāq, from Mujāhid, from Ibn ʿUmar …” He then cited the hadith. “My father said: ‘This hadith is not authentic. Its transmission from Abū Isḥāq is inconsistent. Rather, Nufayʿ al-Aʿmā narrated this hadith from Ibn ʿUmar, from the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace.’”

I say: This criticism is exceedingly strange, especially coming from such a leading hadith critic. Had he confined his remarks to the chain of transmission alone, it would have been less objectionable than his denial of the hadith’s authenticity. For it is well known to scholars that a hadith may not be authentic through one chain, yet be authentic through another chain, through corroborating reports, or through the combined strength of its routes of transmission. They therefore explicitly state that one who encounters a hadith with a weak chain should not say, “It is a weak hadith,” but rather, “Its chain is weak”—unless he is among the hadith masters who have gathered all its routes and chains of transmission; in that case, he may do so.