Surat Al-Ahzab is as long as Surat Al-Baqarah

I would like to know the authenticity of this hadith regarding Surat Al-Ahzab being as long as Surat Al-Baqarah before the abrogation. I researched it and extracted it at this link
http://www.sonnh.com/Takhreg.aspx?HadithID=152184

and all that remains is Determine whether it is authentic or not, and were the copies really so abundant ??

The answer:

This hadith was narrated by : Ahmad, with his chain of transmission, on the authority of Yazid bin Abi Ziyad, on the authority of Zirr bin Hubaysh, on the authority of Ubayy bin Ka’b, and again on the authority of Asim bin Bahdala, on the authority of Zirr, on the authority of Ubayy .

As for the first, its chain of transmission is weak. Due to the weakness of Yazid bin Abi Ziyad, who is Abu Abdullah Al-Kufi, the servant of Abdullah bin Al-Harith bin Nawfal. Ibn Ma’in said : The hadith is weak, and Ahmad bin Hanbal said: He was not a hafiz, and he said in another place: His hadith is not that, and Abu Zur’ah said: Soft, his hadith is written and not used as evidence. Ibn al-Mubarak said: Throw it away, and Shu’bah said: It was fabricated. Al-Dhahabi said: Saduq, scholar of understanding, Shiite, poor memory, not neglected, and Ibn Hajar said: Weak .

As for the second; So he is also weak; In its chain of transmission is Asim bin Bahdala. He is Ibn Abi al-Najjoud, Abu Bakr the famous reciter, Sheikh Hafs the reciter. Abu Hatim said: In my opinion, his place is the place of truthfulness, good hadith, and he was not a memorizer . Ibn Ma’in said: There is nothing wrong with him, and Abu Zur’ah said: Trustworthy. Al-Ijli said: He had a Sunnah and a good recitation of the Qur’an, a master in recitation. Al-Daraqutni said: There is something in his memorization. Ibn Saad said : He was trustworthy, except that he made many mistakes in his hadith. Ibn Hajar said: He is truthful and has illusions, an argument in recitation .

This narration by Asim was also reported by Al-Nasa’i in “Al-Sunan”, Ibn Hibban in “Al-Sahih”, Al-Hakim in “Al-Mustadrak”, Al-Tabari in “Tahdheeb Al-Athar ” , Al-Bayhaqi in “Al-Sunan”, Al-Tayalisi in “Al-Musnad”, and Abd al-Razzaq in “Al-Musannaf ”. And Al-Tabarani in “Al-Awsat,” and Ibn Salam in “The Virtues of the Qur’an,” and Abu Nu’aym in “The History of Isfahan,” and Al-Asbahani in “Tabaqat Al-Hadithin .”

The hadith revolves around Asim bin Bahdala, and he was unique in this text, and his uniqueness is not considered due to his poor memorization, and this hadith is considered Of what Asim was delusional about .

Written by Abu Anas Al-Azhari..
**********
 
Sheikh Shuaib Al-Arnaout’s comment on the two narrations ...

The first hadith: The one in which “Asim bin Abi Al-Nujood ” is mentioned.. The Sheikh

said : Its chain of transmission is weak. “Asim bin Bahdala” - even if he is truthful - has delusions due to his poor memorization, so it is not possible for him to be unique with such a text. The rest of the narrators of the chain of transmission are trustworthy, the men of the two sheikhs, other than Khalaf bin Hisham, are from Muslim’s men . The second hadith: the one in which “Yazid bin Abi Ziyad ” said Sheikh: Its chain of transmission is weak due to the weakness of Yazid bin Abi Ziyad, who is a Kufi . Ibn Ma’in said :It is not used as evidence. Ibn Al-Mubarak said: Throw it. Shu'bah said: He was a Rifaa

.

Asim bin Bahdala, even if he was truthful, had delusions due to his poor memorization, and this hadith is considered one of his delusions .

Then there is a denial in the text, which is his saying: (I read it with the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace ... )

(From the Musnad of Imam Ahmad... Commentary by Sheikh Shuaib Al-Arnaout and others).