Ahmad 2469

Its isnad is sahih. Abu Dawud narrated it (2/195) from Uthman bin Abu Shayba from Husayn bin Muhammad, then he narrated it from Muhammad bin Ubayd from Hammad bin Zayd from Ayub from Ikrima from the Prophet ﷺ. Abu Dawud said, "He did not mention Ibn Abbas, and this is how people narrated it as mursal, which is well known."Abu Dawud means to fault the connected chain by means of the disconnected one, and Bayhaqi followed him in this, but this is an unacceptable form of criticism. Ibn Qayyim rejected this criticism, saying,"According to the method of Bayhaqi, most jurists, and all the scholars of legal theory, this hadith is sahih, because Jareer bin Hazim is a reliable and firmly established narrator, and he connected it. They themselves say that an addition by a reliable narrator is acceptable. So why is it accepted in one place, indeed in most places where it agrees with the school of the one who blindly follows, yet rejected in a place where it contradicts his school?!They have accepted the addition of a reliable narrator in more than two hundred hadiths, whether by raising it to the Prophet, connecting it, or adding a wording or the like. This would be the case even if Jareer alone had narrated it, but how much more so when Zayd bin Habban corroborated him in raising it from Ayub, as Ibn Majah mentioned in his Sunan."See Muntaqa 3468, and in Awn al-Mabud, quoting from Fath, "Criticizing this hadith is meaningless, for its various routes strengthen one another." See also 2365.