Ahmad 6633

Its isnad is sahih. Zayd bin Hubab Ukayli is trustworthy, his reliability was already established at 597, and we add here that Bukhari mentioned him in Al-Kabir 2/1/358, and Ibn Saad in Al-Tabaqat 6:381. Hubab is with damma on the unpointed ha and a light first ba. Ukayli is with damma on the unpointed ain and sukun on the kaf, a relation to Ukl, a clan of Tamim.Abdul-Rahman bin Shurayh bin Abdullah Maafiri is trustworthy. Ahmad, Ibn Main, Nasai, and others confirmed his reliability. Yaqub bin Sufyan said he had many narrators, and Ibn Saad alone declared him daif, saying in Al-Tabaqat 7/2/203 that his hadith is munkar.Shurahbil bin Yazid, this name here is an error. The correct form is Shurahbil bin Yazid. We hold that this error came from Zayd bin Hubab, because the hadith will come at 6637 through the narration of Abdullah bin Mubarak from Abdul-Rahman bin Shurayh from Shurahbil bin Yazid in the correct form. Shurahbil's biography was already given at 6565.Muhammad bin Hudayya Sadafi is a trustworthy tabii. Ajli confirmed his reliability, saying he was an Egyptian tabii who was trustworthy. Ibn Yunus said he has no hadith other than one, meaning this hadith. Bukhari mentioned him in Al-Kabir 1/1/257.Hudayya is with fatha on the ha, kasra on the unpointed dal, and shadda on the lower ya, as Dhahabi vocalized it in Al-Mushtabih 539, where he said, it is also said Hudayya, in the diminutive form. It occurs as Hudba with a dotted ba here and at 6637, which is a scribal error.Sadafi is with fatha on both the unpointed sad and dal, and the explanation of this attribution was already given at 6575.The hadith will come twice, at 6634 and 6637, and its sourcing will follow at the end of the second of them, Allah willing.