Ahmad 2032

Its isnad is sahih. Hakam is Ibn Utayba. Abdul-Hameed bin Abdul-Rahman bin Zayd bin Khattab is trustworthy, as stated earlier at 1472.Abu Dawud narrated this hadith 1:108-109 by this route, from Musaddad from Yahya, then said, "This is the sahih narration, he said, 'A dinar or half a dinar.' Shubah may not have made it a raised hadith (marfu)."Imam Ahmad alluded to this here, saying, "Neither Abdul-Rahman nor Bahz made it marfu," meaning that Abdul-Rahman bin Mahdi and Bahz bin Assad both narrated it from Shubah with this same isnad, but as a stopped report (mawquf) attributed to Ibn Abbas.Ibn Abu Hatim said in Al-Ilal, 50-51, quoting his father, "The narration varies. Some narrate it from Miqsam from Ibn Abbas as mawquf, while others narrate it from Miqsam from the Prophet as mursal. As for the report from Shubah, Yahya bin Saeed made it marfu, and it is reported that Shubah himself made it marfu, saying, 'Hakam narrated it to me as marfu once and as mawquf once.'"Darimi narrated it 1:254 from Abu Walid and from Saeed bin Amir, from Shubah, as mawquf, and said, "Shubah said, 'As for what I remember, it is marfu, but so-and-so and so-and-so said it is not marfu.' Some of the people said, 'Tell us what you remember and leave aside what so-and-so and so-and-so said.' He replied, 'By Allah, I would not want to live in this world for as long as Nuh lived and then report this hadith, or remain silent about it.'"This hadith has long been a point of contention among the scholars of hadith regarding whether it is sahih or defective. The truth is that it is a sahih hadith, and the soundest of its narrations and wordings is the one given here. I have thoroughly examined this matter in my commentary on Tirmidhi, 1:244-254, where I gathered everything I could find of its narrations and chains of transmission.This hadith was also narrated by Hakam bin Utayba directly from Miqsam, as in the narration of Bayhaqi 1:315. It has been criticized on the grounds that Hakam did not hear it directly from Miqsam, based on the evidence of Shubah's narration here, which has it from Hakam from Abdul-Hameed from Miqsam. But this criticism carries no weight. Ahmad bin Hanbal and Yahya Qattan both stated definitively that Hakam heard only five hadiths from Miqsam, this hadith being one of them, as mentioned in Al-Tahdheeb 2:434. This shows that he heard it both from Miqsam and from Abdul-Hameed, sometimes narrating it through the one and sometimes through the other.Many of its paths of transmission and wordings will follow in Al-Musnad at 2121, 2122, 2201, 2458, 2595, 2789, 2844, 2997, 3145, 3428, 3473. See also the references I pointed to in my commentary on Tirmidhi.