Azami 3631

Abdullah bin Ahmad (21240) narrated it from Hudba bin Khalid, who said, Hammad bin Salama narrated to us, from Humayd, from Hasan, from Utayy, who said... then he related it. Its isnad is hasan given what has been said about Utayy, who is Ibn Damra Saadi. His son Abdullah and Hasan narrated from him, and Ibn Saad, Ajli, Ibn Hibban and others deemed him trustworthy. Hafiz relied on him in Taqrib, saying, "Trustworthy." The hadith has been criticized on account of his being the sole narrator of it.I say, his being the sole narrator does not harm the hadith so long as he is trustworthy.Hakim (1/344-345) narrated it through two other routes. The first, from Abu Bakr bin Nasr Dar Bardi in Marw, who said, Abu Mawajjih narrated to us, who said, Saeed bin Mansur and Ali bin Hajar narrated to us, both saying, Hushaym narrated to us, who said, Yunus bin Ubayd informed us. The second, from Ahmad bin Jafar Qatii, who said, Abdullah bin Ahmad bin Hanbal narrated to us, who said, my father narrated to me, who said, Ismail narrated to us, both of them, meaning Hushaym and Ismail bin Ulaya, from Yunus bin Ubayd, from Hasan, from Utayy, from Ubayy bin Kaab, and he related something similar.Hakim said, "This is a hadith sahih in isnad, and the two of them (Bukhari and Muslim) did not include it. It belongs to the category where the follower has only a single narrator, for Utayy bin Damra Saadi has no narrator other than Hasan. In my view, the two sheikhs criticized it on another ground, namely that it has been narrated from Hasan, from Ubayy, without mentioning Utayy."He then narrated it through another route, from Yazid bin Abdullah bin Usama bin Had, from Hasan, from Ubayy bin Kaab, as a raised hadith, similarly but in shortened form. He said, "This does not invalidate the hadith of Yunus bin Ubayd, for he is more knowledgeable of the hadith of Hasan than the people of Madinah and Egypt, and Allah knows best."I say, among the flaws raised against this hadith is the disagreement over whether it is raised or stopped, and the correct view is that it is raised, since that carries additional knowledge. Among the flaws raised against this hadith is that Hasan reported it with an ambiguous form of transmission ("an"), and he is known to practice tadlis. I say, the explicit statement of direct narration has been established with Bayhaqi (3/404), except that there it is in stopped form, and the establishment of this explicit statement in the stopped version strengthens the likelihood of direct hearing, and thereby removes from it the suspicion of tadlis.There is other discussion regarding the isnad, but what I have mentioned is the best of it. And with Allah lies success.