Azami 5642

Abu Dawud (2670) narrated it from Saeed bin Mansur, and it is also in his own Sunan (2624), "Hushaym narrated to us, Hajjaj narrated to us, Qatada narrated to us, from Hasan, from Samura bin Jundab," who said, and then he mentioned it. Its chain is hasan because of Hajjaj, who is Ibn Artah, since his hadith is hasan when he explicitly states that he heard it directly, because he is a mudallis.Ahmad (20230) also narrated it from Hushaym with his chain, but it does not contain the explicit statement from Hajjaj, and that goes back to Hushaym, since he was recorded sometimes with the explicit statement and other times without it, and the explicit statement contains additional knowledge. Likewise he narrated it (20145) from Abu Muawiya, from Hajjaj, without the explicit statement.Tirmidhi (1583) narrated it through another route, from Walid bin Muslim, from Saeed bin Bashir, from Qatada, in similar fashion. Walid bin Muslim is a mudallis, and he used the ambiguous form "an", and Saeed bin Bashir is daif by the agreement of the scholars. Despite this, Tirmidhi said, "hasan gharib." In one manuscript, "hasan sahih gharib." He said, "Hajjaj bin Artah narrated it from Qatada in similar fashion," so perhaps he graded its path as sahih or hasan on account of Hajjaj corroborating him.As for Hasan, it has been mentioned repeatedly before that he heard from Samura bin Jundab without qualification, and Tirmidhi leans toward this view as well. He said, "The shurukh are boys who have not yet reached puberty."