“Authentic according to Muslim’s criteria,” and al-Dhahabi concurred. I say: All its narrators are trustworthy and among Muslim’s narrators, apart from Qays ibn Anif, whom I have been unable to identify. He is Qays ibn Abi Qays al-Bukhari, whom al-Mizzi mentioned among those who narrated from Qutaybah ibn Sa‘id. Yet I was likewise unable to find a biographical notice for him.

Another narrator of his generation was Qays ibn Muslim ibn Mansur al-Azraq al-Bukhari. Al-Khatib included his biography in his Tarikh (12/463), mentioning that he narrated in Baghdad from Ali ibn Hujr and others. Muhammad ibn Makhlad, al-Tabarani, and others narrated from him, but he did not mention any narrator criticism or accreditation concerning him. I say: It is therefore possible that he is the narrator of this hadith: his father’s name would then be Muslim and his kunyah Abu Qays. As for “Anif” in al-Mustadrak, it may be a corruption of “Ibn Abi Qays.” And Allah knows best, for it contains many textual corruptions and scribal errors.

However, I have seen another hadith of his, which I cited in Sahih al-Targhib (1/227/564) as reported by al-Hakim through the route of this Ibn Anif, and which al-Hakim declared authentic. Al-Dhahabi said: “Its chain is sound.” Allah knows best. In any case, he was not alone in narrating this hadith. Abu al-Shaykh also reported it in Akhlaq al-Nabi (pp. 297–298) through two other routes from Abu Awanah, with the same chain. Muslim (8/220), al-Tirmidhi (2373), and Ahmad (4/268) likewise reported it through other routes from Simak ibn Harb, with similar wording. Al-Tirmidhi said: “An authentic hadith.”

Shubah differed from them, narrating it from Simak, from al-Numan ibn Bashir, from Umar, and then mentioning it. Thus, he made it a report from Umar. In my view, this is anomalous; what is correct is that it is a report from al-Numan, as narrated by the group. Ibn Majah (2/536) and Ahmad (1/24) also reported it from Shubah with the same chain.