Azami 4382

Abu Dawud (2355), Tirmidhi (695), Ibn Majah (1699), and Ahmad (16228) narrated it, and Ibn Khuzayma (2067) and Hakim (1/431–432) graded it sahih, all of them through routes from Asim Ahwal, from Hafsa bint Sirin, from Rabab, from her uncle Salman bin Amir, and he related it. Tirmidhi said, "Hasan," and in one manuscript, "Hasan sahih." He said that Ibn Uyayna added (meaning, from Asim), "for it is a blessing," after his statement, "let him break his fast with dates." Nasai said in "Kubra" (3306), "This phrase, 'a blessing,' we do not know of anyone who mentioned it besides Ibn Uyayna, and I do not think it is preserved." So he said! But Muhammad bin Fudayl also added it, from Asim, as found in Ibn Khuzayma. Ibn Majah did not mention it, though he also narrated it through the route of Muhammad bin Fudayl.Its chain is hasan because of Rabab, with a fatha on the first letter, bint Sulay Dabbiyya Basriyya. Abu Hatim graded her hadith sahih, as related from him by his son Abdul-Rahman in "Ilal" (1/237). He said, "I asked my father about a hadith narrated by Hammad bin Salama, from Asim, from Hafsa bint Sirin, that Rabab..." and he mentioned the hadith of Salman, that the Prophet ﷺ said, "When one of you fasts, let him break his fast with dates, and if he cannot find any, let him break his fast with water, for it is purifying." My father said, "This hadith was narrated by Hisham bin Hassan and more than one other narrator from Hafsa, from Rabab, from Salman, from the Prophet ﷺ." I said to my father, "Which of the two is more sahih?" He said, "Both are sahih, but Hammad shortened it, and it has also been narrated from Asim in a similar manner." End of quote.Hakim said, "Sahih according to the standard of Bukhari."The hadith has been criticized for being stopped, but the correct view is that it is connected, just as it has been criticized for inconsistency due to an error occurring in the chain, but the correct view is that there is no inconsistency in it. A narration transmitted through a sahih route is not harmed by someone else narrating it through a daif, inconsistent route, as Bayhaqi said (4/239) after narrating it through the route of Yunus bin Habib, from Tayalisi, and it is in his "Musnad" (1278), from Shuba, from Asim, who said, "I heard Hafsa bint Sirin narrating from Rabab, from Salman bin Amir, that the Prophet ﷺ said," and he related it.Bayhaqi said, "This is how I found it in the 'Musnad', Abu Dawud established its chain of transmission. Mahmud bin Ghaylan narrated it from Abu Dawud without mentioning Rabab. It was narrated from Rawh bin Ubada, from Shuba, as connected. Saeed bin Amir narrated it from Shuba but erred in its chain." Then he presented it through his route, from Shuba, from Abdul-Aziz bin Suhayb, from Anas bin Malik, who said, "The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, 'Whoever finds dates, let him break his fast with them, and whoever does not, let him break his fast with water, for it is purifying.'" Bukhari said, as reported from him by Abu Isa, "The hadith of Saeed bin Amir is a mistake, Saeed erred, and the correct hadith is that of Asim from Hafsa bint Sirin." End of quote.I say, the hadith of Saeed bin Amir, from Shuba, was narrated by Tirmidhi (6904), Ibn Khuzayma (2066), and Nasai in "Kubra" (3317). Tirmidhi said, "As for the hadith of Anas, we do not know of anyone who narrated it from Shuba in this manner besides Saeed bin Amir, and it is an unpreserved hadith. We do not know of any basis for it in the hadith of Abdul-Aziz bin Suhayb, from Anas." Then he mentioned what is correct regarding the hadith of Shuba. Ibn Khuzayma said, "No one narrated this from Saeed bin Amir, from Shuba, except him."I say, therefore this hadith of Anas cannot serve as a corroborating witness for the hadith of Salman Dabbi, because the witness would then be the very narration being witnessed for, since the error occurred through Saeed bin Amir, as Bukhari and others said. Hakim said, "It has a sahih corroborating witness according to the standard of Muslim," and he mentioned the hadith of Anas bin Malik that follows. It should not be criticized on the grounds that this one is a command while the one that follows is an action, due to the difference between the two transmitters, rather the command confirms the action.This Rabab bint Sulay Dabbiyya gained reliability through the statements of the scholars regarding this hadith, and perhaps that is because of the existence of corroborating narrations, otherwise she would be obscure, as Ibn Mulaqqin said in "Badr Munir" (5/697), even while grading her hadith sahih, because no one narrated from her except Hafsa bint Sirin, and no one deemed her reliable except Ibn Hibban. Therefore Hafiz said of her, "Acceptable," meaning if corroborated, and I have not found any corroborator for her.