وَهَذَا أَبُو عُثْمَانَ النَّهْدِيُّ وَأَبُو رَافِعٍ الصَّائِغُ، وَهُمَا مِمَّنْ أَدْرَكَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةَ وَصَحِبَا أَصْحَابَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مِنَ الْبَدْرِيِّينَ هَلُمَّ جَرًّا، وَنَقَلَا عَنْهُمُ الْأَخْبَارَ حَتَّى نَزَلَا إِلَى مِثْلِ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ وَابْنِ عُمَرَ وَذَوِيهِمَا، قَدْ أَسْنَدَ كُلُّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا عَنْ أُبَيِّ بْنِ كَعْبٍ عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ حَدِيثًا، وَلَمْ نَسْمَعْ فِي رِوَايَةٍ بِعَيْنِهَا أَنَّهُمَا عَايَنَا أُبَيًّا أَوْ سَمِعَا مِنْهُ شَيْئًا.
Translation: Abū ʿUthmān and Abū Rāfiʿ lived through the pre-Islamic era and received reports from many Companions, including veterans of Badr and later Companions. Each transmits a Prophetic report from Ubayy ibn Kaʿb, but Muslim knows of no particular report explicitly documenting their seeing or hearing from Ubayy.
Living during the Jāhiliyyah does not by itself prove Companion status: the sentence says they accompanied *the Prophet’s Companions*. Their dates and transmission activity support the plausibility of meeting without supplying the disputed explicit formula.
Narrator identification: Abū ʿUthmān al-Nahdī is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Mull; Abū Rāfiʿ al-Ṣāʾigh is Nufayʿ al-Madanī. The commentary also cites Abū Rāfiʿ’s remark about two rewards on being emancipated. These identifications prevent confusion with other persons bearing similar kunyahs.
«هَلُمَّ جَرًّا» is an idiom of proceeding onward or continuing in sequence. Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ objects to its application here because it commonly implies a course continuing down to the speaker’s time, whereas Muslim is tracing generations of Companions. Ibn al-Anbārī supplies a linguistic sense of advancing or persisting in a course of action; on that explanation it can describe successive transmission from earlier to later Companions. This resolves a question of idiom, not a question of additional isnāds.