Furthermore, a number of trustworthy narrators reported from him.

The hadith is authentic, for it has corroborating reports. Among them is a report from Abu Bakrah, traced back to the Prophet with the same wording, recorded by Abu Nuʿaym in Akhbar Isfahan (2/224), through Abu Jaʿfar al-Akhram: ʿAmmar ibn Khalid narrated to us; al-Qasim ibn Malik al-Muzani narrated to us, from Khalid al-Hadhdhaʾ, from ʿAbd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakrah, from his father.

Its narrators are trustworthy and are narrators of the Two Sahihs, apart from ʿAmmar ibn Khalid, who is trustworthy, as are those below him in the chain. Al-Haythami said (10/169): “Al-Tabarani narrated it, and its narrators are those of the authentic collections, apart from ʿAmmar ibn Khalid al-Wasiti, who is trustworthy.”

It has also been authentically reported from Khalid through another chain, as a mursal report. Ibn Abi Shaybah said in al-Musannaf (12/21/1): “Hafs ibn Ghiyath informed us, from Khalid, from Abu Qilabah, from Ibn Muhayriz, traced back to the Prophet with the same wording.” This is an authentic mursal chain; its narrators are trustworthy and are narrators of the Two Sahihs. Ibn Muhayriz’s name was ʿAbd Allah.

However, Yaʿqub ibn Ahmad al-Sayrafi recorded it in al-Muntaqa min Fawaʾidih (257/2), through Abu Nuʿaym: Sufyan narrated to us, from Khalid, from Abu Qilabah, from ʿAbd al-Rahman ibn Muhayriz, with the same wording. Perhaps this is more correct, for Ibn Abi Hatim mentioned it (2/206) through Bishr ibn al-Mufaddal, from Khalid al-Hadhdhaʾ, with the same wording. He said: “My father said: It is said that he is ʿAbd Allah ibn Muhayriz, which is correct. Khalid likewise reported it from Abu Qilabah.”

I say: If he is ʿAbd Allah, then the chain is authentic; but if he is ʿAbd al-Rahman, it may still be authentic, since Ibn Hibban included him in al-Thiqat (1/129), and a number of narrators reported from him. He is therefore suitable for use as supporting evidence.