that both of them transmitted it through Zabbān, and that its chain is very weak.” End quote.
If al-Ṭabarānī transmitted it by a route other than this one—and I do not think so—especially the narration of Ibn Lahīʿah from Zabbān from Sahl, then what the author and al-Haythamī said is refuted; for Zabbān and his shaykh, Sahl, are among the narrators concerning whom the hadith critics differed, and whom the author discussed separately at the end of this book, saying …”
I say: He then went on at length for nearly half a page, citing the statements of the hadith critics concerning Zabbān—both those who deemed him trustworthy and those who declared him weak—to no useful purpose. For even if his weakness is conceded, I have already given the answer to that, and there is no need to repeat it. Yet it is necessary to point out the hasty assertions he made:
First: He did not consult Musnad Aḥmad or al-Ṭabarānī’s Muʿjam, and thus failed to discover that there is no difference between its narration and Aḥmad’s narration.
Second: I have not found in Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid what he attributed to al-Haythamī, and it contradicts what I cited from him just above. I fear that, while writing, his eye may have moved to another hadith, just as he himself repeatedly related that al-Mundhirī had done.
Third: His statement, “and I do not think so,” confirms what I mentioned under “First”; otherwise, he would have known that al-Ṭabarānī—and likewise Aḥmad—transmitted it by a route other than that of Zabbān.
Fourth: What he attributed to Ibn Ḥajar—that he ascribed it to Abū Yaʿlā—is not found in the printed edition of al-Iṣābah. If it does appear in some manuscripts, then it is an error on the part of its author; otherwise, it is one of al-Nājī’s errors, for the author did not mention it in the unchained version of al-Maṭālib al-ʿĀliyah, nor in its version with chains of transmission.
Fifth: One consequence of his failure to consult the Musnad and al-Ṭabarānī’s work is that he endorsed his teacher’s statement, “Its chain is very weak,” which entails declaring the hadith weak. Accordingly, he based on this his later statement (37-1/2):