Ahmad 1738

Its chain of transmission is problematic, I do not know its explanation. Ismail bin Ayyash Himsi is trustworthy, as we said at 530, but he makes unusual reports and errs in what he narrates from the people of Madinah and Makkah. Bukhari said in Kabir 1/369-370, what he narrates from the Levantines is more sound. As for his teacher Salim bin Abdullah, I cannot say with certainty who he is, but I lean toward his being Salim bin Abdullah Makki, who is trustworthy, Thawri narrated from him and said, he was well regarded, and Ahmad and Ibn Hibban confirmed his trustworthiness. This one belongs to a generation from which Ismail bin Ayyash could plausibly have narrated. As for Salim bin Abdullah bin Umar and Salim bin Abdullah Nasri, it is not possible for Ismail to have met them, because he was born in the year 102 or 105 or 106, while Salim bin Umar died in the year 106 and Nasri died in 110.Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Aqeel died in the year 142, so it is very unlikely that he would have been of an age to witness the marriage of his grandfather Aqeel bin Abu Talib and then say that he set out to meet them after the marriage, given that there were eighty years between his death and the death of his grandfather. The chain has been recorded in K as it appears here, but above the words "Abdullah bin" an extended kha has been placed, indicating that it is omitted in some copies. If this is correct, the chain would read, from Salim bin Abdullah, from Muhammad bin Aqeel, who said, "Aqeel married," and so on, and this seems more likely to be correct, since Muhammad bin Aqeel narrates from his father, as stated in Tahdheeb. However, it does not mention that anyone narrated from him other than his son Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Aqeel. So perhaps the correct chain is, from Salim bin Abdullah, from Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Aqeel, from his father, and the phrase "from his father" was inadvertently dropped by copyists. I cannot state any of this with certainty, for I have not found this hadith transmitted through this particular chain anywhere except here.Furthermore, Tahdheeb mentions no criticism or endorsement of Muhammad bin Aqeel, so he is an obscure follower of the companions (tabii mastur), and in Taqrib he is described as acceptable, and he has no entry in Tarikh al-Kabir by Bukhari. The hadith will come again right after this one with a different chain but the same meaning.Al-rifa, with a kasrah on the ra, means harmony, agreement, blessing, and increase, and its origin comes from the mending of a garment, and the additional phrase has a variant reading in the margin of K.