Explanation of the Sixth Hadith: The Hadith of Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that an Arab came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and said

The Shaykh : The author then cited another hadith that may carry the same meaning as the first hadith, but if we look closely, we find a difference in implication between it and the first one; namely, his statement: "And from Ibn 'Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that an Arab came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and said: 'I have seen the crescent moon.'" This is the first difference and variation between the previous narration and this one. In the previous one, the one who testified was Ibn 'Umar, a Companion, the son of a Companion. The witness here is an Arab who came from the desert and the Messenger (peace be upon him) did not know him; therefore, he said in the hadith: He said—meaning the Messenger to the Arab—: . He said: Yes. He said: . He said: Yes. He said: . It was narrated by the five [collections] and graded authentic by Ibn Khuzaymah and Ibn Hibban, and al-Nasa'i preferred its being mursal.
Now that you have known that there is a difference in implication between this hadith and the previous one; meaning that in this one, the acceptance of the witness's testimony is broader than in the first hadith; because the Messenger (peace be upon him), if the hadith is authentic—and I will speak about its authenticity soon, if Allah wills—was satisfied with this Arab whom he had not known before; "Are you a Muslim?" "Yes." "What is your proof of your Islam?" "I testify that there is no god but Allah." "And do you also testify that I am the Messenger of Allah?" He said: "I testify." So he ordered Bilal to call the adhan; meaning to announce to the people that they should fast tomorrow. So the Messenger (peace be upon him) was satisfied with this man whom he did not know by his testifying that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; meaning that he knew he was a Muslim. But he did not test him or know his intelligence, acumen, or shrewdness as was the case with the first hadith, in which the witness was 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn al-Khattab; and yet he accepted his testimony. So this contains a wide facilitation, and this means that the judge is satisfied with the apparent status of the witness without bringing in those who vouch for him who know him, as was the custom of judges in the past; he is satisfied with knowing his Islam. This is an Arab whom he (peace and blessings be upon him) did not know before, so he was satisfied with his testifying before him with the two testimonies; so he is a Muslim, having what we have and owing what we owe. And based on his testimony and his Islam, he said: .
But is this hadith authentic?
The author mentioned that there is disagreement among the scholars of hadith regarding it, and he explicitly stated that some of them graded it authentic, namely al-Hafiz Ibn Khuzaymah and his student Ibn Hibban. But he followed that by stating that the Imam, the critic, al-Hafiz Abu 'Abd al-Rahman al-Nasa'i preferred its being mursal. The meaning of this statement is that the hadith was narrated from Ibn 'Abbas through the route of 'Ikrimah from him. Some narrators narrated it this way, connected (musnad) from 'Ikrimah from Ibn 'Abbas that an Arab... and other narrators made it mursal; meaning that they did not mention Ibn 'Abbas in its chain of narration, but rather said: "From 'Ikrimah that an Arab came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)." 'Ikrimah was a Tabi'i who did not live to see the era of Prophethood and Messengership, so when he says: "An Arab came to the Messenger," there is a gap and a break between him and this hadith he is narrating. So this hadith is generally called a mursal hadith, and it is sometimes described as munqati' (disconnected), and the first description is more precise. Some narrators said: "From 'Ikrimah from Ibn 'Abbas," so it is connected, and some narrators said: "From 'Ikrimah that an Arab..."