Ahmad 7135

Its isnad is sahih. Hushaym's doubt about whether he heard it from Zuhri does not affect this, because he stated clearly that if he did not hear it from him directly, then he heard it from Sufyan bin Husayn, from him. So it is simply a transition from one trustworthy narrator to another trustworthy narrator.As for Sufyan bin Husayn Wasiti, his reliability has already been established, along with a reference to what has been said about his narration from Zuhri in 4634 and 4807, though what was said does not actually affect this, since they merely mentioned that he heard from him during the pilgrimage season. It is as though they consider that he did not master narrating from him. But that would apply only where he erred and contradicted someone more reliable or more retentive than himself. In that case, yes, but as a blanket judgment, no.In this particular hadith he did not err, for someone else has corroborated him in it from Zuhri, as will appear in its sourcing, Allah willing. Ibn Abu Hatim gave him a biographical entry in Jarh wa Tadil 1/227-228.This hadith will come again in similar form, both at length and in summary, in 7255, through the narration of Sufyan bin Uyayna from Zuhri, and in 7737, 9290, and 10361, through the narration of Maamar from Zuhri. Bukhari related it in 9:515-516 through the two narrations of Maamar and Ibn Uyayna, and Muslim related it in 2:121 through the narration of Maamar.The tafsir of atirah and farah has already been given in the hadith of Abdullah bin Amr bin As, 6713. See also 6759.