- "The prayer was initially prescribed as two rakʿahs, two rakʿahs. When the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) arrived in Medina, he performed the same number of rakʿahs for each prayer except Maghrib, as it is the witr of the day, and the Fajr prayer due to the length of its recitation. When he traveled, he returned to his original prayer." It was recorded by al-Ṭaḥāwī in "Maʿānī al-Āthār" (1/241) through the route of Marjī ibn Rajāʾ who said: Dāwūd narrated to us from al-Shaʿbī from Masrūq from ʿĀʾishah, who said: and he mentioned it. I say: This isnād is good; its men are trustworthy except for Marjī ibn Rajāʾ, about whom there is disagreement. Al-Dhahabī mentioned him in "al-Mutakallim fīhim bimā lā yūjib al-radd," and said (173/319): "Al-Bukhārī has a suspended narration for him, and his ḥadīth is acceptable." The summarization of the scholars' statements about him was done by the ḥāfiẓ, who said in "al-Taqrīb": "Truthful, but sometimes errs." I say: Evidence has been established that he has preserved [the narration] and did not err, with a reliable corroborator and witness. As for the corroborator, it is Maḥbūb ibn al-Ḥasan: Dāwūd narrated it to us. It was recorded by al-Sirāj in "Musnad" (Q 120/2) through two routes from him, and it was authenticated by Ibn Khuzaymah and Ibn Ḥibbān as in "Tamām al-Minnah" (304), and the ḥāfiẓ used it as evidence as will be mentioned. Maḥbūb's name is Muḥammad and Maḥbūb is his nickname. Ibn Maʿīn said: "There is no harm in him." Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt." Al-Nasāʾī said: "Weak." Abū Ḥātim said: "Not strong." I say: Such a person can be used as supporting evidence at the very least, and to this the ḥāfiẓ alluded by saying:
- "أول ما فرضت الصلاة ركعتين ركعتين، فلما قدم ﷺ المدينة صلى إلى كل صلاة مثلها غير المغرب، فإنها وتر النهار، وصلاة الصبح لطول قراءتها، وكان إذا سافر عاد إلى صلاته الأولى". أخرجه الطحاوي في "معاني الآثار" (١ / ٢٤١) من طريق مرجى بن رجاء قال: حدثنا داود عن الشعبي عن مسروق عن عائشة قالت: فذكره. قلت: وهذا إسناد حسن رجاله ثقات غير مرجى بن رجاء فإنه مختلف فيه وأورده الذهبي في "المتكلم فيهم بما لا يوجب الرد"، وقال (١٧٣ / ٣١٩): "علق له البخاري، جائز الحديث". وقد لخص كلام الأئمة فيه الحافظ، فقال في "التقريب": "صدوق ربما وهم". قلت: قد قام الدليل على أنه قد حفظ ولم يهم، بمتابع له معتبر وشاهد. أما المتابع فهو محبوب بن الحسن: حدثنا داود به. أخرجه السراج في "مسنده" (ق ١٢٠ / ٢) من طريقين عنه، وصححه ابن خزيمة وابن حبان كما في "تمام المنة" (٣٠٤)، واحتج به الحافظ كما يأتي، ومحبوب هذا اسمه محمد ومحبوب لقبه، قال ابن معين: "ليس به بأس". وذكره ابن حبان في "الثقات". وقال النسائي: "ضعيف". وقال أبو حاتم: "ليس بالقوي". قلت: فمثله يستشهد به على الأقل، وإلى ذلك أشار الحافظ بقوله: