Ahmad 581

Its isnad is daif. Faraj bin Fadala is daif. Bukhari said in Tarikh al-Kabir 4/1/134, "His hadith is munkar," and Muslim said the same.Abu Ibrahim Tarjumani is Ismail bin Ibrahim bin Bassam, discussed earlier at 530.Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Amr bin Uthman bin Affan is the one known as Dibaj because of his handsomeness. He was trustworthy, a prolific transmitter of hadith, and learned. Mansur killed him in the year 145. His mother was Fatimah bint Husayn bin Ali bin Abu Talib, a trustworthy Follower. Her cousin Hasan bin Hasan bin Ali bin Abu Talib married her, and she bore him Abdullah, Ibrahim, Hasan, and Zaynab. He then died, leaving her a widow, and Abdullah bin Amr bin Uthman bin Affan married her afterward. Her son Abdullah bin Hasan gave her in marriage to him at her own request, as Ibn Saad states at 8/347-348.So the correct form of the isnad is, Faraj bin Fadala, from Muhammad bin Abdullah bin Amr bin Uthman. But what appears in the three manuscript copies is, Faraj bin Fadala, from Abdullah bin Amr bin Uthman, which is an error, because Abdullah bin Amr bin Uthman is the husband of Fatimah bint Husayn, not her son, and he died long ago in Egypt in the year 96. For this reason we have corrected the isnad by adding "Muhammad bin," since it is clear that the error came from the copyists, not from the original text of the book.The hadith appears in Majma al-Zawaid 5/100-101, where it is said, "It contains Faraj bin Fadala. Ahmad deemed him trustworthy, while Nasai and others declared him daif. The rest of its narrators are trustworthy, unless someone has been dropped from the isnad."It appears to me that Hafiz Haythami became confused about the isnad when he found it as "Faraj bin Fadala, from Abdullah bin Amr bin Uthman," and he was justified in suspecting that someone had been dropped from it. However, he did not verify that Abdullah was the husband of Fatimah, not her son, and that the error originated with the copyists, as we have explained.