who states that he did not hear from him; in that case, it is sufficient for us that they were contemporaries and could have met—as is the preferred view of the majority of scholars—provided there is no concealment in transmission. To my knowledge, Shurayh was not accused of any concealment in transmission, and scholars do not regard it as necessarily connected to mursal transmission. How many a trustworthy narrator has been described as transmitting mursal reports, while his hadith is nevertheless authentic according to the two Shaykhs, let alone others—even when he narrates it using an ‘an formula! This is, Allah willing, not obscure to one who has practised this discipline and truly come to know it. And Allah knows best.

As for the hadith, al-Mundhiri, indicating that it is strengthened, said (4/12/4):

“Al-Tabarani narrated it, and its transmitters are trustworthy.”

Al-Haythami likewise said this in al-Majmaʿ (8/78). ********

3387—“Whoever consults a soothsayer and believes what he says has disbelieved in what was revealed to Muhammad.”

Al-Bazzar narrated it in his Musnad (3/400/3045): Uqbah ibn Sinan narrated to us; Ghassan ibn Mudar narrated to us; Saʿid ibn Yazid narrated to us, from Abu Nadrah, from Jabir ibn ʿAbd Allah, from the Prophet: ... and then cited it. He said:

“We know of no one who narrated it from Jabir except by this route, and we have not heard anyone narrate it from Ghassan except Uqbah.”

I say: Al-Hafiz said in Mukhtasar al-Zawaʾid (1/647/1171):

“The Shaykh—that is, al-Haythami—said: ‘He is trustworthy.’”

I say: This is correct, contrary to al-Haythami’s other statement in Majmaʿ al-Zawaʾid (5/117):