Ahmad 7982

Its chain of transmission is sahih. Musa bin Tariq, Abu Qurra Zubaydi, his reliability was established earlier at 5582, and it should be added here that Ibn Abu Hatim gave his biography at 148/1/4. Musa bin Uqba, with damma on the ain and sukun on the qaf, his reliability was established earlier at 2604, and it should be added here that Ibn Abu Hatim gave his biography at 154-155/1/4.In all three original manuscripts here the name appears as "Uyayna" with a ya instead of a qaf. This is certainly a copyist's error. We have corrected it based on Jami al-Masanid wal-Sunan, where it is confirmed correctly, and moreover, as far as we know, there is no narrator named Musa bin Uyayna among the transmitters. The hadith appears in Jami al-Masanid wal-Sunan 7:81, taken from this very place, and Abu Naeem narrated it in the Hilya 9:223, from Ahmad bin Yusuf bin Khallad, from Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal, from his father Imam Ahmad, with this same chain. Abu Naeem then said, this is gharib from the hadith of Musa bin Uqba, transmitted solely by Abu Qurra Musa bin Tariq. Haythami mentioned it in Majma al-Zawaid 10:172 and said, Ahmad narrated it, and its narrators are the narrators of the Sahih, except for Musa bin Tariq, who is thiqa (trustworthy).Hakim narrated it in Mustadrak 1:449, but he omitted one of the Followers and added another man to the chain. He narrated it via Yahya bin Yahya Nisaburi, from Kharija, that is, Ibn Musab, from Musa bin Uqba, from Muhammad bin Munkadir, from Ata bin Yasar, from Abu Hurairah. Hakim said, this is a hadith sahih in its chain, for the only objection raised against Kharija was his narrating from unknown narrators, but when he narrates from reliable, established narrators, his narration is acceptable. Dhahabi concurred with him in grading it sahih.Kharija bin Musab Khurasani Sarakhsi is a figure of considerable disagreement among scholars. Hakim's assessment here comes closer to fairness. Bukhari gave his biography in Tarikh al-Kabir 2/1/187 and in Tarikh Saghir p.197, and in Duafa p.12, as did Ibn Saad 7/2/104, Ibn Abu Hatim 1/2/375-376, and Nasai in Duafa p.11. Ibn Saad said, the most scrupulous people avoided his hadith and abandoned him. Nasai said, his hadith is matruk (abandoned). Ibn Main said, he is nothing, and some even accused him of fabrication.What appears clear from the sum of their statements is that he was not precise and used to make mistakes, in addition to his practice of tadlis in narrating from a weak, fabricating narrator, namely Ghiyath bin Ibrahim. This is why Bukhari said in his biography in Tarikh Saghir, he practices tadlis by narrating from Ghiyath bin Ibrahim, and Ghiyath's hadith has been lost, so his sound hadith cannot be distinguished from the rest.Ibn Abu Hatim narrated, from Muslim bin Hajjaj, the author of the Sahih, who said, I heard Yahya bin Yahya being asked about Kharija bin Musab, and he said, Kharija, according to us, has straightforward hadith, and there was nothing objectionable in his hadith except what he used to obscure through tadlis from Ghiyath, for we had already identified those particular hadiths, so we do not hold that against him. This is a fair and balanced statement from Yahya bin Yahya.Hakim's narration comes via Yahya bin Yahya from Kharija, so the suspicion of tadlis is removed from it by Yahya's testimony. However, the addition of Muhammad bin Munkadir into the chain, between Musa bin Uqba and Ata bin Yasar, we consider to be among the errors Kharija made, given what is known of his tendency toward mistakes in his narrations. So the chain in the Musnad here is the sahih one.This supplication is firmly established as sahih from the hadith of Muaz bin Jabal, and it will come later in the Musnad [5:245, 247]. Abu Dawud narrated it at 1522, Nasai at 1:192, and Hakim at 3:273-274. Munziri mentioned it in Targhib wal-Tarhib 2:262, and also attributed it to Ibn Khuzayma and Ibn Hibban in their two Sahihs.