Regarding the word yarkabūn, it does not mean what you think Or claimed. It has different meanings. For example, in the book Al-Nihayah fi Gharīb al-Hadith wa al-Athar, vol. 2, p. 227, it says:

In the Hadith narrated by Abu Huraira: “Umar Rakibani” (comes from the word Yarkab or Yarkabūn). The word Yarkab here means “he followed” or “came after his footsteps,” because the Raakib (follower) takes the same path as Al-Markoob (the one being followed). As the saying goes: “I followed (Rakibtu, Yarkabūn) his footsteps and his path when I followed (Tabitahu) him in quickness.”

So in this case, the word does not mean what you think or claimed but It means the jinn followed him, not what you assume or claim.

Also, consider this example from Hudhayfah bin al-Yamaan. He was asked:

"What is the worst trial?"

Hudhayfah replied:

"The worst trial is that good and evil are presented before you while you do not know which one to follow."

(The word used here is Tarkab, which comes from Yarkabūn – Hilyat al-Awliyaa, 7/271.)

So it is clear: you do not “ride” the truth or falsehood physically. Rather, you follow (Tarkab or Yarkabūn) either the truth or falsehood.

first of all, from our authentic Hadith in Sahih Muslim 450a, Ibn Mas‘ud himself said that he was not with the Prophet ﷺ during that night, and that he was searching for the Prophet. He was not watching the Prophet, as this fabricated Hadith claims.

As for the Hadith from Musnad Ahmad 3788, no, my friend—it is not authentic. In fact, it is very weak

First of all, it contradicts more authentic Hadith, such as the one in Sahih Muslim 450a.

This Hadith contains a chain of narrator that includes Imam al-Bakali, who is weak. And Our great scholar Imam al-Bukhari himself said that al-Bakali (or ‘Amr) never heard this from Ibn Mas‘ud. He only claimed to have heard it, but in reality, he did not. This is mentioned in al-Tarikh al-Saghir, vol. 1, p. 234, by Imam al-Bukhari.

Scholars such as Ibn Kathir said that this chain of narration is very strange (weak)—he mentioned this in his Tafsir on Sūrah Al-Ahqaf, verse 29.

Other versions of this Hadith, or versions with different chains of narration, exist—such as Tirmidhi 2861. However, these Hadiths do not mention Al-Zutt or Zinn doing anything with the Prophet, and they do not support the claim in any way. Moreover, this Tirmidhi Hadith is also weak.

Regarding the word yarkabūn, it does not mean what you think Or claimed. It has different meanings. For example, in the book Al-Nihayah fi Gharīb al-Hadith wa al-Athar, vol. 2, p. 227, it says:

In the Hadith narrated by Abu Huraira: “Umar Rakibani” (comes from the word Yarkab or Yarkabūn). The word Yarkab here means “he followed” or “came after his footsteps,” because the Raakib (follower) takes the same path as Al-Markoob (the one being followed). As the saying goes: “I followed (Rakibtu, Yarkabūn) his footsteps and his path when I followed (Tabitahu) him in quickness.”

Am I to believe that Momo was indeed a homo?

Regarding the word yarkabūn, it does not mean what you think Or claimed. It has different meanings. For example, in the book Al-Nihayah fi Gharīb al-Hadith wa al-Athar, vol. 2, p. 227, it says:

In the Hadith narrated by Abu Huraira: “Umar Rakibani” (comes from the word Yarkab or Yarkabūn). The word Yarkab here means “he followed” or “came after his footsteps,” because the Raakib (follower) takes the same path as Al-Markoob (the one being followed). As the saying goes: “I followed (Rakibtu, Yarkabūn) his footsteps and his path when I followed (Tabitahu) him in quickness.”

So in this case, the word does not mean what you think or claimed but It means the jinn followed him, not what you assume or claim.

Also, consider this example from Hudhayfah bin al-Yamaan. He was asked:

"What is the worst trial?"

Hudhayfah replied:

"The worst trial is that good and evil are presented before you while you do not know which one to follow."

(The word used here is Tarkab, which comes from Yarkabūn – Hilyat al-Awliyaa, 7/271.)

So it is clear: you do not “ride” the truth or falsehood physically. Rather, you follow (Tarkab or Yarkabūn) either the truth or falsehood.

I know those who believe in three gods but somehow claim it is one—this really doesn’t require any brain cells, because they believe anything without fact-checking.

Now, first of all, from our authentic Hadith in Sahih Muslim 450a, Ibn Mas‘ud himself said that he was not with the Prophet ﷺ during that night, and that he was searching for the Prophet. He was not watching the Prophet, as this fabricated Hadith claims.

As for the Hadith from Musnad Ahmad 3788, no, my friend—it is not authentic. In fact, it is very weak

First of all, it contradicts more authentic Hadith, such as the one in Sahih Muslim 450a.

This Hadith contains a chain of narrator that includes Imam al-Bakali, who is weak. And Our great scholar Imam al-Bukhari himself said that al-Bakali (or ‘Amr) never heard this from Ibn Mas‘ud. He only claimed to have heard it, but in reality, he did not. This is mentioned in al-Tarikh al-Saghir, vol. 1, p. 234, by Imam al-Bukhari.

Scholars such as Ibn Kathir said that this chain of narration is very strange (weak)—he mentioned this in his Tafsir on Sūrah Al-Ahqaf, verse 29.

Other versions of this Hadith, or versions with different chains of narration, exist—such as Tirmidhi 2861. However, these Hadiths do not mention Al-Zutt or Zinn doing anything with the Prophet, and they do not support the claim in any way. Moreover, this Tirmidhi Hadith is also weak.

Regarding the word yarkabūn, it does not mean what you think Or claimed. It has different meanings. For example, in the book Al-Nihayah fi Gharīb al-Hadith wa al-Athar, vol. 2, p. 227, it says:

In the Hadith narrated by Abu Huraira: “Umar Rakibani” (comes from the word Yarkab or Yarkabūn). The word Yarkab here means “he followed” or “came after his footsteps,” because the Raakib (follower) takes the same path as Al-Markoob (the one being followed). As the saying goes: “I followed (Rakibtu, Yarkabūn) his footsteps and his path when I followed (Tabitahu) him in quickness.”

Based on this Sahih hadith, I think it's obvious that Momo was a homo.

Regarding the word yarkabūn, it does not mean what you think Or claimed. It has different meanings. For example, in the book Al-Nihayah fi Gharīb al-Hadith wa al-Athar, vol. 2, p. 227, it says:

In the Hadith narrated by Abu Huraira: “Umar Rakibani” (comes from the word Yarkab or Yarkabūn). The word Yarkab here means “he followed” or “came after his footsteps,” because the Raakib (follower) takes the same path as Al-Markoob (the one being followed). As the saying goes: “I followed (Rakibtu, Yarkabūn) his footsteps and his path when I followed (Tabitahu) him in quickness.”

So in this case, the word does not mean what you think or claimed but It means the jinn followed him, not what you assume or claim.

Also, consider this example from Hudhayfah bin al-Yamaan. He was asked:

"What is the worst trial?"

Hudhayfah replied:

"The worst trial is that good and evil are presented before you while you do not know which one to follow."

(The word used here is Tarkab, which comes from Yarkabūn – Hilyat al-Awliyaa, 7/271.)

So it is clear: you do not “ride” the truth or falsehood physically. Rather, you follow (Tarkab or Yarkabūn) either the truth or falsehood.

I know those who believe in three gods but somehow claim it is one—this really doesn’t require any brain cells, because they believe anything without fact-checking.

Now, first of all, from our authentic Hadith in Sahih Muslim 450a, Ibn Mas‘ud himself said that he was not with the Prophet ﷺ during that night, and that he was searching for the Prophet. He was not watching the Prophet, as this fabricated Hadith claims.

As for the Hadith from Musnad Ahmad 3788, no, my friend—it is not authentic. In fact, it is very weak

First of all, it contradicts more authentic Hadith, such as the one in Sahih Muslim 450a.

This Hadith contains a chain of narrator that includes Imam al-Bakali, who is weak. And Our great scholar Imam al-Bukhari himself said that al-Bakali (or ‘Amr) never heard this from Ibn Mas‘ud. He only claimed to have heard it, but in reality, he did not. This is mentioned in al-Tarikh al-Saghir, vol. 1, p. 234, by Imam al-Bukhari.

Scholars such as Ibn Kathir said that this chain of narration is very strange (weak)—he mentioned this in his Tafsir on Sūrah Al-Ahqaf, verse 29.

Other versions of this Hadith, or versions with different chains of narration, exist—such as Tirmidhi 2861. However, these Hadiths do not mention Al-Zutt or Zinn doing anything with the Prophet, and they do not support the claim in any way. Moreover, this Tirmidhi Hadith is also weak.

Regarding the word yarkabūn, it does not mean what you think Or claimed. It has different meanings. For example, in the book Al-Nihayah fi Gharīb al-Hadith wa al-Athar, vol. 2, p. 227, it says:

In the Hadith narrated by Abu Huraira: “Umar Rakibani” (comes from the word Yarkab or Yarkabūn). The word Yarkab here means “he followed” or “came after his footsteps,” because the Raakib (follower) takes the same path as Al-Markoob (the one being followed). As the saying goes: “I followed (Rakibtu, Yarkabūn) his footsteps and his path when I followed (Tabitahu) him in quickness.”

Summary from Shaykh Arnaut:
This hadith is weak. The main narrator, Amr al-Bikali, did not clearly hear it from Ibn Masud, his reliability is disputed, and most scholars deny that he was a companion. Multiple other routes exist, but they contain weak, unknown, or disconnected narrators, and major hadith critics like Abu Zarah and Abu Hatim stated that nothing authentic is established in this issue. Stronger, authentic reports in Sahih Muslim confirm that Ibn Masud was not with the Prophet ﷺ on the night of the jinn, which further contradicts these narrations. Therefore, the report cannot be considered sound.

Summary from islamqa.info:
Ibn Kathir described it as very strange because it conflicts with the authentic report in Sahih Muslim where Ibn Masud himself states that he was not present that night. The chain of transmission is also weak, since it comes through Amr al-Bikali, whose companionship is disputed and whose hearing from Ibn Masud is not established, as noted by al-Bukhari and the editors of Musnad Ahmad. If one assumes the narration to be sound, the article clarifies the linguistic meaning of the word “henin” in the hadith, showing that it refers to people, similar to saying “so-and-so,” and is supported by Arabic lexicons and by another version explicitly mentioning “men.” It also explains descriptive phrases in the narration, including comparing them to al-Zutt, a known ethnic group, and clarifies that “they rode him” means they crowded around the Prophet ﷺ, drawing on Quranic commentary. In summary, the hadith’s authenticity is doubtful due to a weak chain and contradiction with an authentic Muslim narration, but if accepted, the wording and descriptions have clear linguistic and contextual explanations.