Ahmad 5873

Its isnad is sahih, and this is a repeat of 5866, but there the chain reads (from Umara bin Ghaziya, from Nafi), while here a man has been inserted between them (from Umara bin Ghaziya, from Harb bin Qays, from Nafi). This does not affect, in my view, the soundness of the hadith, for perhaps Umara heard it from Harb from Nafi, and then heard it directly from Nafi, or perhaps he himself or Darawardi left one of the two chains without mentioning an intermediary and connected the other fully.Umara bin Ghaziya was a Madinan of the junior generation of followers, who did meet Nafi, for he died in the year 140, while Nafi died in the year 117, though some say 120.As for Harb bin Qays, he is trustworthy. Bukhari gave his biography in al-Kabir 1/2/57, and related from Bakr bin Mudar who said, "Umara bin Ghaziya claimed that Harb was well regarded." And in al-Taajil, page 92, it says, "Ibn Hibban mentioned him in the third rank of the trustworthy, saying, Harb bin Qays, freedman of Talha, from the people of Madinah, who narrates from Nafi."