Ahmad 567

Its isnad is sahih. Amr bin Sulaym is Zurqi, with damma on the zay and fatha on the ra, and he is a trustworthy Follower, who died in the year 104. His mother is not mentioned by name by any of those who wrote about the Companions, rather they said, "the mother of Amr bin Sulaym," and in the Tabaqat of Ibn Saad 5/52 it states that her name was Nawwar bint Abdullah bin Harith bin Jammaz, and she was a female Companion.The hadith was narrated by Shafii in Al-Risala 1127, with our commentary, from Abdul-Aziz Darawardi, from Ibn Hadi, from Abdullah bin Abu Salama, from Amr bin Sulaym, adding Abdullah bin Abu Salama to the isnad, who is Majishun. It will come again at 824 from Qutayba, from Layth, from Ibn Hadi, in the same manner. So it appears that this name dropped out of the manuscripts of the Musnad, or it is an oversight on the part of Saeed bin Salama bin Abu Hussam.The hadith was pointed to by Hafiz in Al-Isaba 8/263, where he included Abdullah bin Abu Salama in its isnad. Saeed bin Salama is trustworthy, and Muslim narrated from him. His father's name is given here in H and Ha as Maslama, which is an error, and we have corrected it from K and from the other sources.As for his statement, "so let no one fast it," Suyuti said in Uqud al-Zabarjad, "This is how it occurs in this narration, but the correct form would be 'fa-la yasumha' or 'fa-la yasumannaha.' The explanation for this narration is that the mim is read with damma, so that its wording is that of a statement of fact while its meaning is that of a command." What I consider more likely is that this is a permissible dialectal usage, treating the weak (defective) verb form like the sound verb form, and there are ample examples of this that grammarians interpret accordingly. See Shawahid al-Tawdih wal-Tashih by Ibn Malik, 11-15.