Nasai

(1) The aforementioned narration is reported through various chains. In some versions, the names of both individuals involved in the fight are kept hidden. In some, the one who bit is specified, and in others, the one who was bitten is mentioned. Imam Nawawi rahimahullah states that it is possible these are two separate incidents: in one, the fighters were Yazla and another person, and in the other, Yazla’s servant and another individual. However, the more correct view appears to be that this is a single incident, and reconciliation between all the narrations is as follows: the fight took place between Yazla and his servant. The one who bit was Yazla himself, and it was his own tooth that broke. Perhaps this is why he kept his name concealed. ‘Imran ibn Husayn radi Allahu anhu explicitly mentioned Yazla’s name (Hadith: 4764), and the one who was bitten was his servant. Thus, “a man from among the Muslims,” “a man from Banu Tamim,” “the other bit,” and “the man bit” all refer to Yazla.

(2) In some narrations, it is “Ya’la ibn Umayyah,” and in others, “Ya’la ibn Munyah.” There is no difference in this. Umayyah is the name of Ya’la radi Allahu anhu’s father, and Munyah is his mother’s name. Therefore, sometimes his lineage is attributed to his father and sometimes to his mother, so there is no problem in this. For details, see: (Fath al-Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari: 12/274, 275)