(6/208),” yet they remained silent! Although al-Bukhārī also records it through a route other than that of Ibn Lahīʿah, with a good chain of transmission and a strong corroborating narration for ʿĀmir ibn Saʿd, as will be explained.
- Al-Bukhārī said in the place referred to above in al-Tārīkh: “Ibn Wahb said: ʿAmr informed us that Sulaymān ibn Ḥumayd related to him that ʿĀmir ibn Saʿd ibn Abī Waqqāṣ”—Sulaymān said: “I only know him as narrating from his father”—“from his father, from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him).”
Abū Nuʿaym transmitted it with a connected chain in Ṣifat al-Jannah (1/80/57), through the route of Ḥarmalah ibn Yaḥyā: “Ibn Wahb narrated to us,” with this same chain.
I say: This is a good chain of transmission. Its narrators are trustworthy, well known, and among Muslim’s narrators, except Sulaymān ibn Ḥumayd—al-Muzanī. Ibn Ḥibbān declared him trustworthy (6/385) and included his reports in his Ṣaḥīḥ. Seven trustworthy narrators transmitted from him. Ibn ʿAsākir gave his biography in Tārīkh Dimashq (22/220–222), mentioning that he was a Medinan who settled in Damascus, and that Ibn Ḥibbān transmitted his reports in his Ṣaḥīḥ. See Taysīr al-Intifāʿ. These facts escaped our brother, ʿAlī Riḍā, who categorically declared him unknown!
As for the other route, al-Bukhārī also said: “Muḥammad ibn al-Muthannā said: Wahb ibn Jarīr narrated to us; my father narrated to us; I heard Yaḥyā ibn Ayyūb, from Yazīd ibn Abī Ḥabīb, from ʿUmar, from Saʿd ibn Abī Waqqāṣ—may Allah be pleased with him—from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) ...” Then he cited it.
I say: This too is a good chain of transmission. Its narrators are trustworthy and among the narrators of the two Shaykhs, except ʿUmar—namely, ʿUmar ibn Saʿd ibn Abī Waqqāṣ. Al-Dhahabī said in al-Mīzān:
“He was not himself accused of dishonesty, but he took part in fighting al-Ḥusayn and committed heinous deeds.”
I say: Nevertheless, al-ʿIjlī declared him trustworthy. Al-Ḥāfiẓ said:
“Truthful.”
*******