ʿAmr, with a fuller wording:
“A woman said: ‘Messenger of Allah, my womb was a vessel for this son of mine, my breast was a source of drink for him, and my lap was a refuge for him. His father has divorced me and wishes to take him away from me.’ The Messenger of Allah said to her: ‘You have the greater right to him so long as you do not remarry.’”
Al-Ḥākim said: “Its chain of transmission is authentic.” Al-Dhahabī concurred with him.
I say: Rather, it is good, due to the well-known disagreement concerning the narrations of ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb from his father, from his grandfather.
The erudite Ibn al-Qayyim said in Provisions for the Hereafter in the Guidance of the Best of Servants:
“People have needed ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb for this hadith and have found no alternative here but to use it as evidence. The hadith revolves around him, and there is no hadith from the Prophet concerning the loss of custody through remarriage other than this one. The four imams and others have adopted this view. He explicitly stated that the grandfather was ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr, thus invalidating the claim of those who say: ‘Perhaps he was Muḥammad, Shuʿayb’s father, in which case the hadith would be mursal.’ It has also been established that Shuʿayb heard from his grandfather, ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr, thus invalidating the claim of those who say that it is interrupted. Al-Bukhārī cited it as proof outside his Ṣaḥīḥ and expressly affirmed the authenticity of his hadith. He said: ‘Al-Ḥumaydī, Aḥmad, Isḥāq, and ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd Allāh used his hadith as evidence; who remains after them?!’ This is his wording. Isḥāq ibn Rāhawayh said: ‘To us, he is like Ayyūb narrating from Nāfiʿ, from Ibn ʿUmar.’ In The Sciences of Hadith, al-Ḥākim related that there was consensus on the authenticity of his hadith.”
Her words, “my womb was a vessel for him,” and so on, were an assertion of her claim and an appeal based on her exclusive bond with him, just as he was uniquely connected to her in these three respects, in none of which the father shared. Through this exclusive bond, she drew attention to the exclusive right that she sought through her request for a legal ruling and her dispute. This is evidence