Ahmad 7935

Its chain of transmission is sahih. The addition of "from his father" after "Suhayl bin Abu Salih" is a necessary addition. We have added it from manuscript S alone, for it was not mentioned in H, K, or M. This is an old error in the copies of the Musnad, in fact older than these copies themselves, because Hafiz bin Kathir transmitted it in Jami al-Masanid wal-Sunan, 80, from this very passage of the Musnad without it as well. However, he mentioned it in the entry for Zakwan Abu Salih, the father of Suhayl, and he did not create a separate entry under the name of Suhayl at all. Had the hadith, in his view, been a narration of Suhayl from Abu Hurairah with a broken chain, he would certainly have created a special entry for it, Allah willing. Rather, he found it this way, incomplete, in the copy of the Musnad that reached him, so he recorded it as it came to him. Yet he placed it correctly in its proper location, in the entry for Abu Salih, and perhaps he left off pointing this out until the time he would finalize his book after completing it, so as to draw attention to the correct version and to whatever error had occurred to him. But he never finished the book or finalized it, may Allah have mercy on him.The hadith is certainly the hadith of Abu Salih. Suhayl did not narrate it with a broken chain from Abu Hurairah, rather he narrated it from his father, from Abu Hurairah. The hadith will come later in its correct form, 10836, from Abdul-Samad and Hasan bin Musa, who said, Hammad narrated to us from Suhayl from his father, from Abu Hurairah. Muslim likewise narrated it, 2:295, through the route of Abdul-Aziz bin Muhammad, who is Darawardi, from Suhayl from his father, from Abu Hurairah. As for the coming narration in the Musnad, 10836, Ibn Kathir mentioned it in Jami al-Masanid, 7:32, and said after it, "Ahmad alone transmitted it," but this is a mistake on his part, may Allah have mercy on him, for Ahmad did not transmit it alone, since it is also found in Sahih Muslim, as you can see.