Azami 14686

Tirmidhi (2869), Ahmad (12327), and Bazzar (6896) all narrated it through the route of Hammad bin Yahya al-Abah, from Thabit, from Anas, who said, then he mentioned it. Tirmidhi said, "Hasan gharib from this angle. It is reported from Abdul-Rahman bin Mahdi that he considered Hammad bin Yahya al-Abah reliable and used to say, 'He is one of our teachers.'" Its chain is hasan because of Hammad bin Yahya al-Abah, who is hasan al-hadith. Bazzar said, "We do not know of anyone who narrated this hadith from Thabit, from Anas, except Hammad bin Yahya, and he was not strong, though the earlier scholars did narrate from him."I say, Hammad bin Yahya was not alone in narrating it, rather he was corroborated. Ramahurmuzi narrated it in al-Amthal (69) through the route of Ubayd bin Muslim, companion of Sabiri, from Thabit, in similar wording. A group narrated from Ubayd bin Muslim, and Ibn Hibban mentioned him among the trustworthy narrators, so he is acceptable for corroboration purposes. For this reason Hafiz said in Fath al-Bari (8/7), "This is a hasan hadith, and it has routes that raise it to the level of sahih."Ahmad (12462) also narrated it from Hasan bin Musa, who said, Hammad bin Salama narrated to us, from Thabit, Humayd, and Yunus, from Hasan, in similar wording, as a mursal narration. Ahmad was asked about this hadith and said, "The correct view is that it is mursal."I say, there is no doubt that Hammad bin Salama is among the most reliable narrators when it comes to Thabit, but the narration of the two others also strengthens the case for the connected chain. Perhaps Thabit narrated it in both forms.