Al-Zubair bin Al-Awwam:

No chains are provided of him reporting hadith Al-Ghadir.

Zaid bin Arqam:

The narration of Zaid bin Arqam is without a doubt an authentic narration. A sign of this is the sheer amount of paths to him when he is not known to be one of the biggest narrators. However, some of the chains to Zaid are weak and have various wordings. Below are our conclusions on the chains to Zaid.

• The most famous path for the report is the hadith of Abu Al-Tufail from Zaid bin Aqram. It has been narrated by more than one narrator from Abu Al-Tufail. As we have previously mentioned in the biography of Abu Sareeha, there is an authentic report from Salama bin Kuhail from Abu Al-Tufail from Zaid bin Arqam or Abu Sareeha.
• Another path through Abu Al-Tufail is through Abu Salman Al-Mu’athin who is anonymous in status. He was declared as anonymous by Al-Daraqutni. See Tahtheeb Al-Tahtheeb.
• There is another authentic report by Abu Al-Tufail from the path of Fitr bin Khalifa, in which Al-Tufail. This report includes an addition of, “Allahuma wali man walaah.”
• The above addition can also be found in a weak path which comes from Habeeb bin Abi Thabit from Abu Al-Tufail (and Yahya bin Ju’da). It is weak due to the ‘an‘ana of Habeeb, who has been described as a mudallis. Also, this narration says wali instead of mawla.
• Another weak path is that of Hakeem bin Jubair, who narrates from Abu Al-Tufail the same hadith in Mu’jam Al-Tabarani. However, he too was weakened by many scholars including Yahya, Abdul Rahman, Ahmad, and Ibn Ma’een.
• Another authentic path from a narrator other than Abu Al-Tufail is the hadith of Abi Al-Dhuha, which is found in Al-Sunna by Ibn Abi ‘Asim.
• Ali bin ‘Aabis narrated the same hadith above from the path of Abi Al-Dhuha, however, he added, “Allahuma wali man walaah.” Ali bin ‘Aabis has been weakened by Yahya, Al-Jawzajani, Al-Nasa’ee, Ibn Hibban, and Al-Saji.
• Another path comes through the narration of Thuwair bin Abi Fakhita from Zaid bin Arqam, however, Thuwair is very weak as well and was accused of lying by Sufyan Al-Thawri. See his biography in Tahtheeb Al-Tahtheeb.
• Abu Layla Al-Kindi in Fadha’il Ahmad also narrates the report, however, it comes through the path of Isma’eel bin Yahya bin Salama, who is matrook according to Al-Daraqutni. His father also narrates the report and he was severely weakened by many hadithists.
• Abu Abdullah Al-Shaybani also reported the hadith in Al-Mu’jam Al-Kabeer by Al-Tabarani, however, he report only comes through the path of Yahya bin Salama bin Kuhail, like the previous narration.
• Abu Layla Al-Hadrami is also a narrator from Zaid bin Arqam, however, his path comes through Yunus bin Arqam, who was weakened by Abdul Rahman bin Khirash.
• Another path is the path of Abu Ishaaq Al-Sabee’ee in which he narrates from Al-Baraa’ and Zaid this hadith. However, that is a weak narration. Refer to what have written previously about Al-Baraa’.
• Maymoon Abu Abdullah also narrates this hadith from Zaid. He was weakened by Yahya Al-Qattan, Ahmad, Yahya, Abu Dawud, Al-Nasa’ee, and Abu Ahmad Al-Hakim. Imam Ahmad records the tradition from him in two manners. In one, he includes the addition that is found in the hadith of Fitr, and in another, he states that he didn’t hear it from Zaid. Awf Al-A’rabi also reports it without the weak addition in Khasa’is Ali by Al-Nasa’ee.
• Another narrator that narrated this directly from Zaid bin Arqam was Atiyyah Al-Awfi who was also weakened by many hadith scholars. He affirms that Zaid never narrated the addition. See Musnad Ahmad.
• Another alternative path is the hadith of Amr bin Murra bin Zaid bin Arqam, however, it comes to him through the path of Haseeb, the brother of Hamza Al-Zayyat, and he is unknown in status.

Zaid bin Thabit:

The narration of Zaid bin Thabit is recorded by Ibn Uqda’s Kitab Al-Wilaya. Apart from the very fact that it is narrated by Ibn Uqda, another problem is that the narration comes from Mohammad bin Al-Qasim Al-Asadi who has been declared to be a liar by Imam Ahmad and Al-Daraqutni.

Zaid bin Haritha:

Al-Amini did not notice that one those that had been mentioned as per the book of Ibn Uqda is Zaid bin Haritha. However, there are too many problems with this narrations, apart from the anonymity of some of the narrators in the chain, we find that Zaid is referred to as an Ansari, when he was a Muhajir. Also, it comes through the path of Abu Al-Tufail, which is an obvious mistake, since Abu Al-Tufail narrated the hadith of Zaid bin Arqam and not Zaid bin Haritha. Perhaps these are the obvious reasons as to why Al-Amini did not include this narration in his book.

Zaid bin Sharaheel:

His narration will come in the section on Ya’la bin Murra as a witness of hadith Al-Ghadir.

Zaid bin Abdullah Al-Ansari:

The narration does not include a chain and therefore Zaid bin Abdullah cannot be accepted as a narrator of Hadith Al-Ghadir.

Conclusion: The only authentic tradition in this section is the narration of Zaid bin Arqam.