(1) In Ibn Battāl’s commentary (10:263), after quoting al-Tabarī. (2) The printed editions read: “waqa‘a al-ishkāl … bimā (the difficulty arose … through what).” This alteration by a copyist reversed the intended meaning. (3) No. 30613; Ibn Hibbān (119) also transmitted it through him. It was also transmitted by Ahmad (17317, 17361, 17394), al-Dārimī (3391, 3392), al-Hārith (728, Bughyat al-Bāhith), al-Nasā’ī in al-Sunan al-Kubrā (7980, 7981), al-Firyābī in Fadā’il al-Qur’ān (163), Abū ‘Awānah (3983, 3984), and al-Bayhaqī in Shu‘ab al-Īmān (1815), through several chains from ‘Alī ibn Rabāh al-Lakhmī, from ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Āmir. The hadith is authentic. An authentic corroborating report from Abū Mūsā al-Ash‘arī was transmitted by Muslim (791), Ahmad (19546), and others. (4) This is the reading in all manuscripts and may be an inadvertent error. The correct reading is “Mūsā ibn ‘Alī ibn Rabāh,” as found in the sources transmitting the hadith and in the al-Risālah edition. (5) Changed in the al-Risālah edition to “taghannaw (recite melodiously).” (6) In Ibn Battāl’s commentary (10:259), quoted in al-Tawdīh (24:108), al-Badr al-Munīr (9:642), and Fath al-Bārī (9:71). In al-Badr al-Munīr, Ibn al-Mulaqqin criticized the report from ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr, saying: “The hadith scholar Ibn Nāsir said: This is neither authentic nor established concerning David. He said: He, peace and blessings be upon him, has no need of that, since Allah made his voice more beautiful than the sound of a flute.” (7) All manuscripts except qāf and mīm read “‘Amr ibn Shaybah,” a scribal corruption.