Is the narration of Kathir ibn Murrah al-Hadrami from Aisha sound, especially since he narrated from those who died quickly, such as Mu'adh ibn Jabal and Abu al-Darda'? And is it a condition for proving the soundness of a narrator's narration from his predecessor that his meeting and hearing be proven, or is it sufficient that he be deemed trustworthy, of advanced age, and to have met many of those who participated in Badr and those who died quickly? And what is the opinion of Imam Muslim and Ibn Hazm on that?

Kathir ibn Murrah is trustworthy; no one described him as a mudallis (one who practices tadlis, i.e., conceals defects in a hadith chain), and his narration from Aisha is authentic because it is well-known among the majority of Muhaddithin (hadith scholars) that the narration of a trustworthy, non-deceptive narrator, using a word that suggests hearing, such as ("an" - on the authority of) from someone he contemporized with, along with the possibility of hearing from him, is taken to mean that he heard it, unless there is an indicator that prevents this. Imam Muslim explicitly stated this in the introduction to his Sahih, clarifying that investigating direct hearing is only required for a mudallis narrator, and that this view is agreed upon by scholars. Imam Muslim's statement was not a refutation of Imam Al-Bukhari, as Al-Bukhari does not stipulate actual meeting and hearing; rather, contemporaneity with the possibility of meeting is sufficient for him. Ibn Hazm also follows the view of the majority regarding not stipulating actual meeting and hearing.