“It has a good chain of transmission.”

I say: It includes ʿAtaʾ ibn al-Saʾib, who became confused in his later years; however, he is acceptable in corroborating reports. Ibn Abi al-Dunya and Ibn Hibban (2609) also recorded it through his route.

It has a fourth corroborating report, narrated by Yazid al-Raqqashi from Anas, which Ibn Abi al-Dunya also recorded. A fifth is narrated by al-Walid ibn Husayn al-Shami, who said: Luqman ibn ʿAmir informed me, from Abu Umamah Sudayy ibn ʿAjlan al-Bahili, attributed to the Prophet with the same wording, adding an explanation of the Quranic terms ghayyan and āthāman. Ibn Abi al-Dunya also recorded it, saying: Al-Fadl ibn Ishaq narrated to us; Shababa ibn Sawwar narrated to us; al-Walid ibn Husayn al-Shami informed me....

I say: All the narrators in this chain are trustworthy except al-Walid ibn Husayn al-Shami, who was known as Sharqi ibn Qatami. Al-Saji and others declared him weak. Al-Mundhiri said in al-Targhib (4/231): “Al-Tabarani and al-Bayhaqi reported it as attributed to the Prophet, while others reported it as attributed to the Companion Abu Umamah; and this is more sound.” Al-Haythami said (10/389): “Al-Tabarani reported it, and its chain contains weak narrators whom Ibn Hibban declared trustworthy, though he said that they make mistakes.”

I say: Ibn Abi al-Dunya’s chain contains no one objectionable apart from al-Walid ibn Husayn. As for al-Fadl ibn Ishaq, namely Abu al-ʿAbbas al-Bazzar al-Dawri, al-Khatib included his biography in al-Tarikh (12/360–361) and related from al-Siraj that he was trustworthy and dependable. He died in 242 AH.