Ahmad 7392

Its chain of transmission is daif, due to its inconsistency and the unknown status of its narrator, as will become clear in the discussion of its sources, Allah willing.Ahmad narrated it here from Ibn Uyayna, from Ismail bin Umaya, from Abu Muhammad bin Amr bin Hurayth Adhri, from his grandfather. Ahmad also related that Sufyan said on another occasion, "from Abu Amr bin Muhammad bin Hurayth, from his grandfather," meaning that Sufyan narrated it from Ismail, and then his wording became inconsistent regarding the identity of Ismail's teacher, alternating between Abu Muhammad bin Amr bin Hurayth and Abu Amr bin Muhammad bin Hurayth.Ahmad then mentioned a third variation in Ibn Uyayna's own narration. Uqba (2387) narrated it from Sufyan, from Ismail, from Abu Amr bin Hurayth, from his father. One might have answered for this last narration by saying that he attributed Abu Amr to his grandfather but called him his father in the narration, and such a thing is common, were it not for the further inconsistency that followed, both from Sufyan and from Ismail bin Umaya.Ahmad then mentioned a fourth narration, following that one at 2388, from Abdul-Razzaq, from Mamar and Thawri, both of them from Ismail, from Abu Amr bin Hurayth, from his father, matching Ibn Uyayna's final version. This narration, that of Abdul-Razzaq, will come again twice more in the Musnad, at 7454 and 7604.Abu Dawud narrated it (1690) [255-256 of Awn al-Mabud], from Muhammad bin Yahya bin Faris, from Ibn Madini, from Ibn Uyayna, matching Ibn Uyayna's narration found here at 7386, with its first chain. He had narrated it before that (689) from Musaddad, from Bishr bin Mufaddal, from Ismail bin Umaya, from Abu Amr bin Muhammad bin Hurayth, from his grandfather, which matches Ibn Uyayna's narration here with its second chain.Ibn Majah narrated it (943) with two chains together, from Bakr bin Khalaf, from Humayd bin Aswad, and from Ammar bin Khalid, from Ibn Uyayna, both of them from Ismail bin Umaya, from Abu Amr bin Muhammad bin Amr bin Hurayth, from his grandfather Hurayth bin Sulaym.Ibn Hibban narrated it in Thiqat, in the entry on Hurayth bin Umara of Banu Udhra, pages 169-170, from Abu Yaala, from Abu Khaythama, that is Zuhayr bin Harb, from Sufyan, that is Ibn Uyayna, from Ismail bin Umaya, from Abu Muhammad bin Amr bin Hurayth, from his grandfather.The hadith has other chains along this same line, some agreeing with these narrations and some disagreeing with them. All of them point to the inconsistency and to the unknown status of this teacher from whom Ismail bin Umaya narrates.Bayhaqi mentioned some of these in Sunan al-Kubra 2:270-271, and Bukhari referred to all or most of them in his Tarikh al-Kabir, in the entry on Hurayth of Banu Udhra, 2/1/66-67. Ibn Abu Hatim mentioned some of them in the book Ilal, number 5340.The scholars of hadith terminology have used this hadith as an example of a hadith with an inconsistent (mudtarib) chain. Some of them went to great lengths trying to give preference to some chains over others. If we were to go through their statements, or even summarize them, the discussion would become very long indeed. It suffices to point to their locations for anyone wishing to study them thoroughly, so see Tahdhib 2:235-236, 12:180-181, 223, and Isaba 2:4, and Talkhis Habir 111, and Iraqi's commentary on the introduction of Ibn Salah 104-106, and Iraqi's commentary also on his Alfiyya 1:114, and Sakhawi's commentary on it 99-100, and Tadrib Rawi 93-94.Ibn Uyayna himself was aware of the inconsistency in this hadith, on his own account, and perhaps it originated with Ismail bin Umaya's teacher as well. Ali bin Madini related from him something that indicates this. In Tarikh al-Kabir, following the narration of Ali bin Madini's chain, it states, Sufyan said, "A Basran narrator, Utba Abu Muaz, told us, 'I met this teacher from whom Ismail narrated, and I asked him, and he gave me a confused answer.'" And Ismail, whenever he narrated this hadith, would say, "Do you have anything to support it?"Abu Dawud also related this, following his narration of the hadith through the route of Ibn Madini from Sufyan (690), and made it even clearer than that. Sufyan said, "We found nothing with which to corroborate this hadith, and it has come only through this route." He, that is, the speaker Ibn Madini, said, "I said to Sufyan, 'They differ over it.' He thought for a moment, then said, 'I remember nothing but Abu Muhammad bin Amr.'" Sufyan said, "A man came here after Ismail bin Umaya had died, seeking this teacher Abu Muhammad, until he found him, and asked him about it, and he gave him a confused answer."Bayhaqi then narrated it, 2:271, in more detail than this, through the route of Uthman bin Saeed Darimi, "I heard Ali," meaning Ibn Abdullah Madini, "say, Sufyan said regarding the hadith of Ismail bin Umaya, from Abu Muhammad bin Amr..." referring to this hadith. Ali said, "I said to Sufyan, 'They differ over it, some of them say Abu Amr bin Muhammad, and some say Abu Muhammad bin Amr.'" Sufyan fell silent for a moment, then said, "I remember nothing but Abu Muhammad bin Amr." I said to Sufyan, "But Ibn Jurayj says Abu Amr bin Muhammad." Sufyan fell silent for a moment, then said, "Abu Muhammad bin Amr, or Abu Amr bin Muhammad?" Then Sufyan said, "I used to consider him a brother of Amr bin Hurayth." On one occasion he said, "The Adhri."Ali said, Sufyan said, "A Basran man came to us, one of yours, Utba, that is Abu Muaz, and said, 'I met this man from whom Ismail narrated.'" Ali said, "That was after Ismail bin Umaya had died. He sought out this teacher until he found him." Utba said, "I asked him about it, and he gave me a confused answer." Sufyan said, "We found nothing to support this hadith, and it has come only through this route." Sufyan said, "Ismail, whenever he narrated this hadith, would say, 'Do you have anything to support it with?'"As for Utba Abu Muaz, whom Sufyan describes as having met that teacher, whether Abu Amr bin Hurayth or Abu Muhammad bin Amr, he is Utba bin Humayd Dabbi Basri. Ahmad declared him daif, while Ibn Hibban listed him in Thiqat. Ibn Abu Hatim asked his father about him, and he said, "He was originally from Basra, and used to travel widely in pursuit of hadith, and his hadith is acceptable (salih)." See his entry in Tahdhib 7:96, and in Jarh wa Tadil 3/1/37.As for the word Adhri here, it appears in H and M as Adawi, which is a scribal error. We have corrected it based on K and on the references mentioned above.