—a fully connected report in which Ḥakīm appears—yet I had never come across it. So I went to Hārūn ibn Maʿrūf and asked him, “Do you have this narration—from Ibn Wahb, from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUmar?” He replied, “Yes.” I therefore wrote it down from him. Someone then said to Ibrāhīm al-Ḥarbī, “Why did he not write it from Kāmil?” He answered, “In his estimation, Kāmil did not rank with Ibn Wahb.”

I say: There is no doubt that once Imām Aḥmad located the hadith in the transmission of Ibn Wahb, Kāmil’s standing with him improved.

As for ʿAbbās, he transmitted from Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn, “He is nothing.”

Ibn Abī Ḥātim said: “My father narrated from him, and when I asked him about him he said, ‘There is no harm in him; his only flaw was that he used to relate hadith in the congregational mosque.’”

Al-Dāraqutnī declared him “reliable,” and Ibn Ḥibbān likewise listed him in al-Thiqat.

I say: He is truthful—God willing—and I do not understand Abu Dāwūd’s remark, “I threw away his notebooks.” Admittedly, he has some transmissions from Ibn Luhayʿah that are objectionable and unsupported, yet perhaps he had memorized them accurately.

Saʿīd ibn ʿAmr al-Bardhaʿī reported: “I heard Abū Zurʿah mention Kāmil ibn Talḥah. He said, ‘Yaḥyā ibn Aktham had him beaten and set him up before the people over a testimony, so his reputation declined, yet he was not barred from attending hadith gatherings.’”

I have come across one of his higher-level transmissions: ʿAlī ibn Aḥmad al-Hāshimī at al-Thaghr narrated to us; Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad al-Qaṭīʿī narrated to us,