(Hayâtî khayrun lakum tuhaddithûna wa yuhaddathu lakum wa wafâtî khayrun lakum tu`radu a`malukum `alayya famâ ra’aytu min khayrin hamidtu Allâha wa mâ ra’aytu min sharrin istaghfartu Allâha lakum.)
Proof of Authenticity
►The hadith master al-`Iraqi said in the book of Jana’iz of his work Tarh al-Tathrib fi Sharh al-Taqrib: “Its chain is good” (isnâduhu jayyid) [Al-`Iraqi, Tarh al-Tathrib (3:297)]
► The hadith master al-Haythami said: “Al-Bazzar narrated it and its sub-narrators are the men of the Sahih.” [Al-Haythami, Majma` al-Zawa’id (9:24 #91)]
► The hadith master al-Suyuti declared it sound (sahîh) in al-Mu`jizat and al-Khasa’is.
► So did al-Qastallani the commentator of al-Bukhari.
► Al-Munawi also declared, in Fayd al-Qadir, that it is sahîh [Al-Munawi in Fayd al-Qadir (3:401) only reported al-`Iraqi’s words “Its narrators are the men of the Sahih except for `Abd al-Majid ibn Abi Rawwad who, being retained by Muslim as a narrator and being declared trustworthy (thiqa)by Ibn Ma`in and al-Nasa’i,
►So did al-Zurqani in his commentary on al-Qastallani’s al-Mawahib al-Laduniyya.
► So did Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji in his commentary on [al-Qadi `Iyad’s] al-Shifa’ [Al-Khafaji, Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102)]
► So did al-Mulla `Ali al-Qari in his, adding: “Al-Harith ibn Usama narrated it in his Musnad with a sound chain.” [ Al-Qari, Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102), referring to the mursal hadith of Bakr al-Muzani]
► Ibn Hajar also mentioned it in al-Matalib al-`Alya [Ibn Hajar, al-Matalib al-`Alya (4:22)]
► This hadith also came to us through another, mursal way from [the Tabi`î] Bakr ibn `Abd Allah al-Muzani. The hadith master Isma`il al-Qadi narrated it in his monograph on the invocation of blessings on the Prophet ,
► Wahabi Shaykh al-Albani said about it: “Mursal sahîh.“[In his edition of Isma`il al-Qadi’s Fadl al-Salat `ala al-Nabi – Allah bless and greet him – (p. 37), after which he goes on to say that the hadith is weak, as in his Silsila Da`ifa (#979). ] due to obvious wahabi biasness.
► The hadith master Ibn `Abd al-Hadi declared it sound (sahîh) despite his excessive rigor and harshness in his book al-Sarim al-Munki. After all this evidence, does any meddler have anything left to say? The hadith is undoubtedly sound, and no-one questions its authenticity
Shaykh GF Haddad adds to the above in his footnote to the above Hadith:
►Narrated from Ibn Mas`ud by al-Bazzar in his Musnad (1:397) with a sound chain as stated by al-Suyuti in Manahil al-Safa (p. 31 #8) and al-Khasa’is al-Kubra (2:281)
►al-Haythami (9:24 #91)
►and al-`Iraqi in Tarh al-Tathrib (3:297) – his last book, as opposed to al-Mughni`an Haml al-Asfar (4:148) where he questions the trustworthy rank of one of the narrators in al-Bazzar’s chain.
► Shaykh `Abd Allah al-Talidi said in his Tahdhib al-Khasa’is al-Kubra (p. 458-459 #694) that this chain is sound according to Muslim’s criterion
► Shaykh Mahmud Mamduh in Raf`al-Minara (p. 156-169) discusses it at length and declares it sound.
► Sayyid `Abd Allah ibn al-Siddiq al-Ghumari (d. 1413/1993) declared it sound in his monograph Nihaya al-Amal fi Sharh wa Tashih Hadith `Ard al-A`mal.
Opposing these six judgments al-Albani declares it weak in his notes on al-Qadi Isma`il’s Fadl al-Salat (p. 37 n. 1).
Hadith narrated though multiple chains [some weak and others strong]
► It is also narrated with weak chains from Anas and – with two sound mursal chains missing the Companion-link – from the Successor Bakr ibn `Abd Allah al-Muzani by Isma`il al-Qadi (d. 282) in his Fadl al-Salat `ala al-Nabi (p. 36-39 #25-26)
► The latter chain was declared sound by al-Qari in Sharh al-Shifa’ (1:102)
►Shaykh al-Islam al-Taqi al-Subki in Shifa’ al-Siqam, his critic Ibn `Abd al-Hadi in al-Sarim al-Munki (p. 217),
► A third, weak chain is related from Bakr al-Muzani by al-Harith ibn Abi Usama (d. 282) in his Musnad (2:884) as per Ibn Hajar in al-Matalib al-`Aliya (4:23).
Al-Albani declared the hadith weak on the grounds that some authorities questioned the memorization of the Murji’ hadith master `Abd al-Majid ibn `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Abi Rawwad.
Reply and refutation
But Abd al-Majid ibn `Abd al-`Aziz ibn Abi Rawwad was retained by Muslim in his Sahih
declared thiqa by Yahya ibn Ma`in,
Ahmad declared him thiqa
Abu Dawud declared him thiqa
al-Nasa’i declared him thiqa
Ibn Shahin declared him thiqa
al-Khalili declared him thiqa
al-Daraqutni declared him thiqa
al-Dhahabi listed him in Man Tukullima Fihi Wa Huwa Muwaththaq (p. 124) as stated by Mamduh in Raf` al- Minara (p. 163, 167)
Al-Arna’ut and Ma`ruf declare him thiqa in Tahrir al-Taqrib (2:379 #4160)
declared him thiqa by Dr. Nur al-Din `Itr in his edition of al-Dhahabi’s Mughni (1:571 #3793)
declared him thiqa by Dr. Khaldun al-Ahdab in Zawa’id Tarikh Baghdad (10:464).
Even if al-Albani’s grading were hypothetically accepted, then the weak musnad narration in conjunction with the sound mursal one – graded sahîh by al-Albani – would yield a final grading of hasan or sahîh, not da`îf.
Albani contradicts himself again
In addition to this, Mamduh quoted al-Albani’s own words in the latter’s attempted refutation of Shaykh Isma`il al-Ansari entitled Kitab al-Shaybani (1:134-135) whereby “The sound mursal hadith is a proof in all Four Schools and other than them among the Imams of the principles of hadith and fiqh, therefore it is apparent to every fair-minded person that the position whereby such a hadith does not form a proof only because it is mursal, is untenable.”
This is one of many examples in which al-Albani not only contradicts, but soundly refutes himself.