Ahmad 7690

Its isnad is sahih. As for Harith bin Abdul-Muttalib, none of those who wrote biographical entries on him traced his lineage further back. The name of his father is disputed among the reports from Ibn Jurayj, as you can see. Abdul-Razzaq said, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj, Harith bin Abdul-Muttalib. Ibn Bakr, that is Muhammad bin Bakr Barsani, said, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj, Harith bin Abdul-Malik.Bukhari mentioned this disagreement in al-Kabir 1/272/2. He noted that Ibrahim bin Musa Razi related it to him from Hisham bin Yusuf from Ibn Jurayj under the name Harith bin Abdul-Muttalib, matching Abdul-Razzaq's report, and that Abu Aasim related it from Ibn Jurayj as Harith bin Abdul-Malik, matching Ibn Bakr's report. Bukhari preferred the first report, that of Hisham bin Yusuf, meaning that the correct name is Harith bin Abdul-Muttalib, and he said after it, "This is more sahih."The Hafiz mentioned in al-Taajil, pages 77–78, that Ibn Hibban listed him among al-Thiqat under the name Harith bin Abdul-Malik, giving only that name. As for Ibn Abu Hatim in al-Jarh wal-Tadil 1/80/2, he did nothing more than summarize Bukhari's words, but he differed from him by putting the second opinion ahead of the first, saying, "Harith bin Abdul-Malik, and it is also said, bin Abdul-Muttalib." It seems, then, that he leaned toward preferring the second opinion, since he mentioned it first.Whatever the case, the man is reliable, since neither Bukhari nor Ibn Abu Hatim mentioned any criticism of him, and since Ibn Hibban listed him among al-Thiqat. The hadith is also found as numbers 7188 and 7347, through two other routes from Abu Hurairah, with the same meaning.