Errors by Ibn Ḥibbān, al-Mizzī, al-Dhahabī, and Ibn Ḥajar!

The narrator from Ibn Ḥujayrah: Abū Suwayd or Abū Suwayyah?

And Ibn Ḥibbān’s declaring mistaken those who called him Abū Suwayyah; and Ibn Ḥibbān naming him Ḥumayd, while others name him ʿUbayd.

Ibn Ḥibbān narrated in his Ṣaḥīḥ (6/310), from Ibn Aslam, who said: Ḥarmalah ibn Yaḥyā narrated to us; Ibn Wahb narrated to us; ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith informed me that Abū Suwayd told him that he heard Ibn Ḥujayrah report from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Whoever stands (in prayer) with ten verses will not be written among the heedless; whoever stands with one hundred verses will be written among the devout; and whoever stands with one thousand verses will be written among the muqanṭarīn.”

Ibn Ḥibbān said: “Abū Suwayd—his name is Ḥumayd ibn Suwayd, from the people of Egypt; whoever says Abū Suwayyah has erred.”

And he said in al-Thiqāt (6/193): “Ḥumayd ibn Suwayd, Abū Suwayd, from the people of Egypt, narrates from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah; ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith al-Miṣrī narrates from him. Whoever says Abū Suwayyah has erred.”

Ibn Ḥajar objected to him in al-Nukat al-Ẓirāf, saying: “It appears that he himself is the one who erred, for Abū Aḥmad mentioned this man in al-Kunā among those whose names are unknown, saying: ‘Abū Suwayyah,’ then he transmitted his ḥadīth.”

Ibn Mākūlā said in al-Ikmāl (4/394): “As for Suwayyah—with a fatḥah on the sīn, kasrah on the wāw, a doubled yāʾ, and ending with hāʾ—… Abū Suwayyah, ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah ibn Abī Suwayyah al-Anṣārī, their client; he was virtuous. Ḥaywah ibn Shurayḥ, ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith, and others narrated from him.”

Al-Dhahabī said in al-Muqtnā fī Sard al-Kunā (1/300): “Abū Suwayyah: he heard Ibn Ḥujayrah; ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith narrated from him.”

And he said in al-Kāshif (1/691): “ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah ibn Abī Suwayyah, from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah; Ḥaywah ibn Shurayḥ and Ibn Lahiʿah narrated from him.”

Al-Mizzī said in Tahdhīb al-Kamāl (33/395):

“Abū Suwayyah al-Miṣrī, his name is ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah. He narrated from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah (D) and others; ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith (D) and others narrated from him. Abū Dāwūd narrated from him. He narrated the ḥadīth of ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ: ‘Whoever stands with ten verses will not be written among the heedless.’ It was narrated by Aḥmad ibn Ṣāliḥ from Ibn Wahb from ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith. In some narrations with him it appears as ‘from Abū Sūdah,’ which is an error; we have pointed this out in the biography of Suhayl ibn Khalīfah. Abū Saʿīd ibn al-Aʿrābī, Abū al-Ḥasan ibn al-ʿAbd, Abū Bakr ibn Dāsah, and more than one narrated from Abū Dāwūd: ‘Abū Suwayyah,’ which is correct. Thus also narrated Ḥumayd ibn Zanjawayh from Aḥmad ibn Ṣāliḥ, and likewise Yūnus ibn ʿAbd al-Aʿlā from Ibn Wahb. Abū Ḥātim ibn Ḥibbān said: ‘Abū Suwayd—his name is ʿUbayd ibn Ḥumayd; whoever says Abū Suwayyah has erred,’ as he said—yet this is questionable, and Allah knows best.”

Ibn Ḥajar said in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (7/62):

“ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah ibn Abī Suwayyah al-Anṣārī, Abū Suwayyah—also said Abū Suwayd al-Miṣrī—narrated from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah and (mursal) from Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah; Ḥaywah ibn Shurayḥ, ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith, Yaḥyā ibn Abī Usayd, and Ibn Lahiʿah narrated from him. Ibn Mākūlā said: he was virtuous. Ibn Yūnus said: it is said he died in the year 135. Abū Dāwūd narrated one ḥadīth from him without naming him; in some copies it appears as Abū Suwayd, whereas the correct is Abū Suwayyah; likewise it appears in the Musnad of Ḥarmalah via the narration of Ibn al-Muqriʾ. I say: Ibn Ḥibbān narrated it in his Ṣaḥīḥ via Ḥarmalah, but it appears there as Abū Suwayd, and he said: his name is Ḥumayd ibn Suwayd, a trustworthy Egyptian, and whoever says Abū Suwayyah has erred—so he said! Ibn Khuzaymah transmitted it from this route and said: ‘from Suwayyah’; likewise Ḥumayd ibn Zanjawayh transmitted it from Aḥmad ibn Ṣāliḥ from Ibn Wahb—and that is correct. Al-Nasāʾī narrated in al-Kunā via Yaḥyā ibn Abī Usayd from ʿUbayd ibn Abī Suwayyah that he heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah say… and from this route al-Ḥākim transmitted it in al-Mustadrak. Al-Dūlābī said: Abū Suwayyah heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah. Ibn Ḥibbān said in al-Thiqāt: ʿUbayd ibn Suwayd, Abū Suwayd; whoever says Abū Suwayyah has erred. Ibn Yūnus said: he was a righteous man and used to interpret the Qurʾān. Abū ʿUmayr al-Kindī said: he was virtuous—then he transmitted that he died in the year 35,” meaning 135.

And he said in al-Taqrīb (p. 377):

“ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah—with a fatḥah on the consonant, kasrah on the wāw, and a doubled yāʾ—al-Anṣārī, Abū Suwayyah. In Ibn Ḥibbān it appears as Abū Suwayd (with a dāl) in the diminutive; the former is correct. Truthful, from the third generation; he heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah.”

And he also said in al-Kunā (p. 647):

“Abū Suwayd or Abū Sūdah—with a fatḥah on the first letter, kasrah on the wāw, and a doubled yāʾ—Basran; he is ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah. It is also said: ibn Ḥumayd. Whoever says Abū Sūdah has erred.”

I say

It appears that the ḥāfiẓ—may Allah have mercy on him—was inconsistent here. If he preferred Abū Suwayyah, then he should also have said that whoever named him Abū Suwayd erred as well.

The correct view is that he is Abū Suwayyah, and his name is ʿUbayd. Whoever says otherwise has been affected by scribal corruption: the kunyah Abū Suwayyah was miswritten as Abū Suwayd, and his name ʿUbayd was miswritten as Ḥumayd due to the similarity of the script. Allah knows best.

What appears in al-Taqrīb—that Abū Suwayd who is Abū Suwayyah is Basran—is an error. Either it is a corruption in the copies, or it is a mistake by the ḥāfiẓ; he is Egyptian, and the ḥāfiẓ himself explicitly stated this.

He said in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (4/230):

“Suhayl ibn Khalīfah ibn ʿAbdah, Abū Suwayyah al-Faqīmī al-Baṣrī, narrated from Ibn ʿUmar, Qays ibn ʿĀṣim, and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah; his son ʿAbd al-Malik and ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith narrated from him. Abū Dāwūd narrated from him—so said the author of al-Kamāl—and he erred. Rather, Abū Dāwūd narrated for Abū Suwayyah ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah, I say, and it will come. The author then mentioned that there are two Abū Suwayyahs: one is this Suhayl, who narrates from Qays ibn ʿĀṣim and whose son ʿAbd al-Malik narrates from him—he is Basran; the second is Abū Suwayyah ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah ibn Abī Suwayyah, who narrates from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ, and from whom ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith narrates—he is Egyptian; both will come. Neither of them narrated from Ibn ʿUmar. He also mentioned that Abū Ḥātim said that Suhayl was narrated from by ʿAbd al-Salām ibn Ḥarb—he said: this is an error. I say: al-Bukhārī and Yaʿqūb ibn Shaybah also mentioned this. Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned in al-Thiqāt that Abū Suwayyah the Basran narrates from ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb, and he claimed that the Egyptian’s kunyah is Abū Suwayd with a dāl, not Abū Suwayyah—Allah knows best. As for Ibn Mandah and Abū Nuʿaym, they mentioned Abū Suwayyah Suhayl ibn Khalīfah among the Companions; Abū al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzī said: his companionship is questionable—and he is correct, for neither of them mentioned anything that establishes it.”

Did Abū Suwayyah hear this ḥadīth from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah?!

The ḥadīth was narrated by Abū Dāwūd in al-Sunan (2/57) from Aḥmad ibn Ṣāliḥ, who said: Ibn Wahb narrated to us; ʿAmr informed us that Abū Suwayyah told him that he heard Ibn Ḥujayrah report from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:

“Whoever stands (in prayer) with ten verses will not be written among the heedless; whoever stands with one hundred verses will be written among the devout; and whoever stands with one thousand verses will be written among the muqanṭarīn.”

Abū Dāwūd said: “Ibn Ḥujayrah the younger is ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah.”

It was likewise narrated by al-Bayhaqī in Shuʿab al-Īmān (2/400) via Abū Dāwūd.

Ibn Khuzaymah narrated it in his Ṣaḥīḥ (2/181) in the chapter “The virtue of reciting one thousand verses in a night,” and Ibn Khuzaymah said: “If this report is authentic, then I do not know Abū Suwayyah to be either declared upright or criticized.”

Then he cited it from Yūnus ibn ʿAbd al-Aʿlā, from Ibn Wahb, from ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith, with it.

Shaykh al-Albānī authenticated the ḥadīth in al-Ṣaḥīḥah no. (642).

Shaykh Shuʿayb al-Arnāʾūṭ said while editing Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Ḥibbān: “Its chain is ḥasan, and Ibn Ḥujayrah is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah al-Miṣrī, the judge.”

I say

Rather, it is a ḥadīth that is not authentic, and the chain contains a discontinuity.

Ibn Ḥujayrah is not named explicitly in the narration, because the Ibn Ḥujayrah in the chain is ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah, whereas according to Ibn Ḥibbān, al-Mizzī, Ibn Ḥajar, al-Albānī, and al-Arnāʾūṭ he is taken to be ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah, the Egyptian judge, the father of ʿAbdullāh!

Al-Mizzī said in Tahdhīb al-Kamāl (17/54):

“(M, 4) ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah al-Khawlānī, Abū ʿAbdullāh al-Miṣrī, its judge, from Banū Yaʿlā ibn Mālik. He is Ibn Ḥujayrah the elder, the father of ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah the younger. He narrated from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ (D), ʿAbdullāh ibn Masʿūd, ʿUqbah ibn ʿĀmir al-Juhanī (S), Abū Dharr al-Ghifārī (M), and Abū Hurayrah (D T Sī Q). He was narrated from by al-Ḥārith ibn Yazīd al-Ḥaḍramī (M)… his son ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah (Sī), and Abū Suwayyah ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah… Abū Saʿīd ibn Yūnus said: He died in Muḥarram of the year eighty-three.”

He also said (19/213):

“(D) ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah ibn Abī Suwayyah al-Anṣārī, their client, Abū Suwayyah—also said Abū Suwayd al-Miṣrī—he narrated from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah (D), and (mursal) from Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah. He was narrated from by Ḥaywah ibn Shurayḥ, ʿAbdullāh ibn Lahīʿah, ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith (D), and Yaḥyā ibn Abī Usayd. Abū Naṣr Ibn Mākūlā said: he was virtuous. Abū Saʿīd ibn Yūnus said: it is said he died in the year one hundred and thirty-five. Abū Dāwūd narrated one ḥadīth from him,” then he clarified the disagreement over the name “Abū Suwayyah,” noting that in al-Ṭabarānī’s narration it appeared as “Abū Suwayd,” and he preferred that the correct form is “Abū Suwayyah.”

Ibn Ḥajar followed him in this in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (6/145) and (7/62).

Al-Mizzī also said in Tuḥfat al-Ashrāf (6/356):

“ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah al-Khawlānī, Abū ʿAbdullāh, judge of Egypt, from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr. The ḥadīth ‘Whoever stands with ten verses…’ (D) in prayer from Aḥmad ibn Ṣāliḥ, from Ibn Wahb, from ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith: that Abū Suwayyah told him that he heard Ibn Ḥujayrah with it—without naming Ibn Ḥujayrah. In the narration of al-Luʾluʾī it appears ‘that Abū Suwayd,’ and in the rest of the narrations ‘that Abū Suwayyah,’ which is correct. Thus it was narrated by Ḥumayd ibn Zanjawayh from Aḥmad ibn Ṣāliḥ, and likewise by Ḥarmalah ibn Yaḥyā and Yūnus ibn ʿAbd al-Aʿlā from Ibn Wahb.”

Ibn Ḥajar followed him in al-Nukat al-Ẓirāf, then said:

“A note: When Abū Dāwūd narrated the ḥadīth, he said afterward: ‘Ibn Ḥujayrah the younger is ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah.’ One who sees this may imagine that he intended this to be the name of the narrator of this ḥadīth, whereas that is not his intent. Rather, the meaning of his statement is that the narrator of the ḥadīth is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah the elder, and ‘Ibn Abī Ḥujayrah’ is also used and refers to his son, whose name is ʿAbdullāh.”

I say: There is not the slightest indication that Abū Dāwūd intended the meaning Ibn Ḥajar mentioned. Rather, what Ibn Ḥajar tried to negate is precisely what Abū Dāwūd intended. He intended to clarify that this Ibn Ḥujayrah is the younger, pointing to the discontinuity between him and ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr, for he did not hear from him.

I do not know how Ibn Ḥajar understood it in this way. On the contrary, it is Abū Dāwūd’s habit to clarify whom the unnamed person in a narration refers to, especially when a hidden defect in the ḥadīth is involved.

What further supports this is that Abū Suwayyah, the narrator from Ibn Ḥujayrah, died in the year 135 AH, which means it is impossible for him to have heard from the generation of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah the elder (d. 83 AH). Rather, the generation of his shaykhs is that of ʿAbdullāh ibn Ḥujayrah the younger (who died after 100 AH).

Because knowledge of the generations was present in Abū Dāwūd’s mind, he determined that this Ibn Ḥujayrah is the younger, and that escaped al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar, who then said what he said.

Thus, the knowledge of generations establishes that he is the younger, and Abū Dāwūd’s statement is to clarify that he is the younger. Accordingly, the ḥadīth is disconnected, because the younger did not meet ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr. Note carefully the wording in the ḥadīth: “he reports from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr.” Had he heard directly from him, he would have stated that; rather, he narrates from him through an intermediary.

Imām Aḥmad narrated in his Musnad (2/187) from Ḥasan, who said: Ibn Lahīʿah narrated to us; al-Ḥārith ibn Yazīd narrated to us; from Salamah ibn Aksūm, who said: I heard Ibn Ḥujayrah ask al-Qāsim ibn al-Barḥī: “How did you hear ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ report?” He said: I heard him say: “Two disputants brought their case to ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ, so he judged between them. The one against whom judgment was passed became displeased and went to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and informed him. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: ‘When a judge judges and strives and is correct, he has ten rewards; and when he strives and errs, he has one reward or two.’”

I say: If the ḥadīth had been with ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah the elder, would his son ʿAbdullāh the younger not have narrated it from him?

When the early scholars such as al-Bukhārī and Ibn Abī Ḥātim wrote the biography of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah, they did not mention that he narrated from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣ.

Thus, the ḥadīth is disconnected, because the narrator from ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr is Ibn Ḥujayrah the younger, namely ʿAbdullāh, and he did not meet ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAmr. Whoever claimed that the narrator from ʿAbdullāh is the elder has erred, and Allah knows best.

It seems that ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah used to narrate mursal and disconnected reports, and it appears that his occupation with the judiciary did not allow him to give due care to ḥadīth according to its proper principles.

Al-Ṭabarī narrated in his Tafsīr (25/9) from Yūnus, from Ibn Wahb, from ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith, from Abū Suwayyah who told him, from Ibn Ḥujayrah, that it reached him that Mūsā said: “My Lord, Your creation whom You created—you made among them a group in Paradise and a group in the Blaze. If only You had admitted them all into Paradise.” He said: “O Mūsā, raise your crop.” He raised it. He said: “I have raised it.” He said: “Raise.” He raised it, leaving nothing. He said: “My Lord, I have raised it.” He said: “Raise.” He said: “I have raised it except what has no good in it.” He said: “Thus I admit all My creation into Paradise except what has no good in it.”

An error in Ibn Ḥibbān’s Mashāhīr!

Ibn Ḥibbān said in Mashāhīr ʿUlamāʾ al-Amṣār (p. 119): “ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah the elder, Abū ʿAbdullāh, among the trustworthy and precise. He is the one who reverses their two names—Khālid ibn Yazīd—saying: ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Ḥujayrah from his father, whereas it is actually ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah from his father.”

And he said (1/189): “ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah the elder, among the trustworthy of the people of Egypt.”

I say: ʿAbdullāh is the younger, so perhaps this is a copyist’s error; Allah knows best.

Did Abū Suwayyah hear from Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah?!

Al-Mizzī said in Tahdhīb al-Kamāl (19/213): “ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah ibn Abī Suwayyah al-Anṣārī, their client, Abū Suwayyah—also said Abū Suwayd al-Miṣrī—he narrated from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah (D), and from Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah mursal.”

He also said (35/193): “Subayʿah bint al-Ḥārith al-Aslamiyyah—she has companionship; she was married to Saʿd ibn Khawlah; she narrated from the Prophet ﷺ; narrated from her were Zafar ibn Aws ibn al-Ḥadathān and ʿUbayd Abū Suwayyah…”

Ibn Ḥajar said in al-Taqrīb (1/377): “ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah, with a fatḥah on the consonant, kasrah on the wāw, and a doubled yāʾ, al-Anṣārī, Abū Suwayyah. In Ibn Ḥibbān it appears as Abū Suwayd (with a dāl), and the former is correct. Truthful, from the third generation; he heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah. D.”

And he said in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb (7/62): “Al-Nasāʾī narrated in al-Kunā via Yaḥyā ibn Abī Usayd from ʿUbayd ibn Abī Suwayyah that he heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah say: ‘I entered upon ʿĀʾishah…’ and from this route al-Ḥākim narrated it in al-Mustadrak. Al-Dūlābī said: Abū Suwayyah heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah.”

Al-Dūlābī said in al-Kunā wa-l-Asmāʾ (2/624) [Fāryābī edition]: “Abū Suwayyah heard Subayʿah; she said: I entered upon ʿĀʾishah.”

I say

Al-Mizzī considered Abū Suwayyah’s narration from Subayʿah to be mursal, whereas al-Dūlābī affirmed it, as did Ibn Ḥajar, relying on the explicit mention of hearing in the narration reported by al-Ḥākim.

Mughalṭāy objected to al-Mizzī in al-Ikmāl (9/92), saying: “In al-Mizzī’s statement, ‘he narrated from Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah, mursal,’ there is a problem, for al-Nasāʾī explicitly stated his hearing from her in Kitāb al-Kunā. He said: Yaḥyā ibn Ayyūb informed us; Saʿīd narrated to us; Nāfiʿ informed us; Yaḥyā ibn Abī Usayd narrated to us, from ʿUbayd ibn Abī Suwayyah that he heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah say: ‘I entered upon ʿĀʾishah among women from the people of al-Shām…’”

And Abū Bishr al-Dūlābī said in Kitāb al-Kunā: “Abū Suwayyah heard Subayʿah; she said: I entered upon ʿĀʾishah.”

I say: Mughalṭāy’s objection to al-Mizzī is itself problematic. Abū Suwayyah did not hear from Subayʿah and did not meet her. That is why al-Mizzī deemed his narration from her mursal, considering that Abū Suwayyah narrates from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah, a tābiʿī.

As for Mughalṭāy’s argument that al-Nasāʾī explicitly mentioned hearing, that too is problematic. Al-Nasāʾī included the narration in al-Kunā to establish Abū Suwayyah’s name, and the appearance of hearing there does not mean that he authenticated it. As for al-Dūlābī’s statement, it is undoubtedly an error, based on the narration that explicitly mentioned hearing.

Al-Ḥākim narrated the ḥadīth in al-Mustadrak (4/322) from Saʿīd ibn Abī Maryam, who said: Nāfiʿ ibn Yazīd al-Kalāʿī narrated to us; Yaḥyā ibn Abī Usayd narrated to me; from ʿUbayd ibn Abī Suwayyah, that he heard Subayʿah al-Aslamiyyah say: “Women from the people of al-Shām entered upon ʿĀʾishah…” and she mentioned the ḥadīth of the bathhouses.

Al-Ḥākim said: “This ḥadīth has a sound chain, and they did not narrate it.”

I say: Rather, it is not sound; it is muʿḍal. Between ʿUbayd ibn Suwayyah and Subayʿah there are two missing links, and the mention of hearing in the narration is an error and not authentic.

It is astonishing how Ibn Ḥajar relied on this narration and affirmed hearing, despite the fact that there are two generations between them. Subayʿah is a Companion, and Abū Suwayyah is from the followers of the followers, who died in 135 AH—how could he hear from her?!

My strongest suspicion is that the error lies in the mention of hearing by Yaḥyā ibn Abī Usayd, who is an Egyptian not well-known for narration. A group narrated from him, but he is of unknown status, and the ḥadīth is objectionable.

Written by: Khālid al-Ḥāyik
26 Ramaḍān 1429 AH