Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah says: Muhammad bin ‘Ajlan was trustworthy and reliable in hadith.

Tirmidhi says: In our view, Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan has criticized Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan in his narration from Sa'id al-Maqburi. It is narrated from 'Ali ibn al-Madini that Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan says: Muhammad ibn 'Ajlan says: Some of Sa'id al-Maqburi's ahadith are narrated from Abu Hurairah, and some are through a man from Abu Hurairah. Sa'id's narrations became mixed up for me, so we narrated all of them with the chain of Sa'id from Abu Hurairah. In our view, Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan criticized Ibn 'Ajlan for this reason, even though Yahya ibn Sa'id al-Qattan has narrated abundantly from Ibn 'Ajlan.

It is narrated from Ali bin Al-Madini that Yahya bin Saeed Al-Qattan says: Shu’bah narrated with the chain of Ibn Abi Layla from his brother Isa from Abdur Rahman bin Abi Layla from Abu Ayyub from the Prophet ( صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم ) regarding sneezing.

Yahya bin Saeed Al-Qattan says: Then I met Ibn Abi Layla, and he narrated to us that his brother Isa narrated to him, Isa narrated from Ibn Abi Layla, and he narrated from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), and Ali narrated from the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him).

Tirmidhi says: Similarly, whoever criticized Ibn Abi Layla did so only because of the weakness of his memory.

Tirmidhi says: Many such things are narrated from Ibn Abi Layla; sometimes he narrates one thing in this way, then changes its chain of narration, and all this happened only due to weakness of memory. Most of the scholars of the previous era did not write down hadiths, and those who did write, would do so after hearing the hadith.

Tirmidhi says: I heard Ahmad bin Al-Hasan saying, he said: I heard Ahmad bin Hanbal saying: No argument shall be established from Ibn Abi Layla.

Similarly, the scholars who have criticized Mujalid bin Saeed and Abdullah bin Lahi’ah and others, the reason for this is only the weakness of their memory and frequent mistakes in narration. While many Imams have narrated from them, if any of these narrators is alone in narrating a hadith and there is no corroboration for it, then it will not be considered as proof. For example, the statement of Ahmad bin Hanbal that Ibn Abi Layla is not a valid proof; Ahmad bin Hanbal means that when Ibn Abi Layla is alone in narrating something, then he is not a valid proof. And often it happens that the narrator does not remember the chains of narration, so he either omits or adds to the chain, or changes the chain, or narrates with such words that the meaning is altered.

So whoever mentioned the authentic chain and memorized it, but changed the wording, then as long as the meaning does not change, the scholars allow this. 1.

Wathilah bin Al-Asqa’ said: When we narrate a hadith to you conveying its meaning, then that is sufficient for you.