Azami 1530

Abu Dawud (3904), Tirmidhi (135) - and this wording is his - and Ibn Majah (1/209) all narrated it through Hammad bin Salama, from Hakeem Athram, from Abu Tamima, from Abu Hurairah. Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah added, after the words "a soothsayer," the phrase "and believed what he says." Tirmidhi said, "We do not know this hadith except through the narration of Hakeem Athram, from Abu Tamima, from Abu Hurairah." Muhammad (meaning Bukhari) graded this hadith as daif on account of its chain of transmission, and Abu Tamima's name is Tarif bin Mujalid. End of quote.I say, its chain is hasan, for Hakeem Athram's hadith is hasan, and Ibn Madini and Abu Dawud rated him trustworthy. Nasai said, "There is no harm in him." Abu Tamima's name is Tarif bin Mujalid, one of the men relied upon by Bukhari, and Ibn Main rated him trustworthy. Ibn Saad said, "He was trustworthy, Allah willing." Daraqutni said, "Trustworthy." Ibn Abdul-Barr said, "He is trustworthy and an authority according to all of them."Bukhari only graded this hadith as daif for two reasons. First, that Hakeem is not corroborated in this hadith of his, meaning this particular one. But we have already established that Hakeem is trustworthy, or truthful, so the lack of corroboration does not harm him. Second, he said in Tarikh al-Kabir (4/67), "We do not know of Abu Tamima having heard directly from Abu Hurairah." Abu Tamima is trustworthy and not known for tadlis. He died in the year 95 (some say 97), while Abu Hurairah died in the year 58. Mere contemporaneity suffices to establish a meeting, provided the man is not a mudallis, according to the view of the majority.Munawi related from Hafiz Iraqi that he said in his Amali, "It is a sahih hadith." And from Dhahabi, that he said, "Its chain is strong." He said in Kashif, "Hakeem Athram is truthful."Hakim narrated part of this hadith in Mustadrak (1/8), which reads, "Whoever goes to a soothsayer or a fortune-teller and believes what he says has disbelieved in what was revealed to Muhammadﷺ," through the narration of Harith bin Abu Usama, who said, Rawh bin Ubada narrated to us, who said, Awf narrated to us, from Khilas and Muhammad, from Abu Hurairah. He said, "It is sahih according to the criteria of both of them, from the hadith of Ibn Sirin." This is as he said, except that Khilas did not hear directly from Abu Hurairah, but Muhammad bin Sirin corroborated him, and this corroboration strengthens what came before it.The hadith has supporting narrations from Umar bin Khattab, Khuzayma bin Thabit, Abdullah bin Amr bin Aas, Ali bin Talq, Ibn Abbas, and others. Some scholars held the hadith to be daif on account of its wording, arguing that having intercourse with a menstruating woman, or anal intercourse with a woman, is not disbelief. The response given is that the meaning of the hadith, according to the scholars, is to emphasize the severity of this act, not to declare it disbelief.Tirmidhi said following the hadith, "If having intercourse with a menstruating woman were disbelief, one would not have been commanded to offer expiation for it." I say, the hadith about expiation was narrated by the authors of the Sunan collections from Ibn Abbas, and it is daif.