Ahmad 5394

Its chain of transmission is sahih. Jafar bin Rabia bin Shurahbil bin Hasanah Kindi Misri, Abu Shurahbil, is trustworthy. Ahmad said, He was a shaykh among the people of hadith, trustworthy. Ibn Saad, Nasai, and others likewise graded him trustworthy. Bukhari gave him an entry in Kabir 1/2/189, 190, and attributed him to Quraysh, which agrees with what will come later in the Musnad at 10825.Abdul-Rahman bin Rafi Hadrami was given an entry by Ibn Hajar in Tajil, 249-250, where he said, from Ibn Umar, and that his son Ibrahim, Jafar bin Rabia, and others narrated from him. Husayni said, There is something questionable about him. I say [the speaker is Ibn Hajar], He is the judge of Ifriqiya who has an entry in Tahdhib, and his narration in the Musnad and elsewhere is from Ibn Amr bin As, not from Ibn Umar bin Khattab. Abu Saeed bin Yunus stated firmly that he was Tanukhi, while whoever attributed him to Hadrami did so on account of an alliance he had with them.Husayni only distinguished between the two men because he thought Hadrami was different from Tanukhi, supposing that Tanukhi narrated from Ibn Amr while Hadrami narrated from Ibn Umar. But he was not correct, for the hadith in both cases is one and the same, and the narrator is one and the same, namely his son Ibrahim!It is clearly evident that this is not sound verification but plain error, that Husayni was not mistaken in distinguishing between Tanukhi and Hadrami, and that Ibn Hajar strained to merge the two attributions without any evidence. He apparently did not see this passage in the Musnad, or it had slipped his mind when he wrote, so he denied that Hadrami explicitly narrated from Ibn Umar bin Khattab, yet here is his narration from him, clearly established. He confined the narration to a single hadith narrated by Ibrahim bin Abdul-Rahman Tanukhi, from his father, from Ibn Amr bin As, as though implicitly denying the narration of Jafar bin Rabia, which Husayni had pointed to, from Abdul-Rahman bin Rafi Hadrami, yet here it is too, likewise established.So the view I hold, which I am nearly certain of, is that Hadrami is different from the Tanukhi who has an entry in Tahdhib, though I did not find an entry for him in the references available to me. I have only graded his hadith as sahih on the basis that he is a Follower, as is clear from the context, so his standing is that of an obscure but acceptable narrator, and because the hadith he narrated is sahih and firmly established from Ibn Umar through the narration of Nafi from him, as has already passed at 4602 and 4963.