“He would make mistakes and err concerning trustworthy narrators.” Al-Dāraquṭnī mentioned in al-Gharāʾib that he alone narrated this hadith from Mālik, that he erred in it, and that one hadith became conflated with another for him, as stated in al-Lisān. Regarding Muḥammad ibn al-Mughīrah, al-Sulaymānī said: “There is some question concerning him.”
The third route is through Khulayd ibn Daʿlaj, from Qatādah, from him. Ibn ʿAdī narrated it (120/1). Khulayd is weak.
The fourth route is through ʿUbayd Allāh ibn Tammām, who said: Yūnus ibn ʿUbayd narrated to us, from al-Ḥasan, from him. Ibn ʿAdī also narrated it (237/1) and said: “Some of what ʿUbayd Allāh ibn Tammām narrates consists of objectionable reports, and no trustworthy narrator corroborates him in this.”
- The hadith of ʿAmmār has two routes. The first is through al-Fuḍayl ibn Sulaymān, who said: Mūsā ibn ʿUqbah narrated to us, from ʿUbayd ibn Salmān al-Agharr, from his father, from him. It was narrated by Ibn Ḥibbān (2307), al-Bazzār (2843—al-Kashf), al-Rāmahurmuzī in al-Amthāl, al-Bayhaqī in al-Zuhd, and al-Shāmūkhī in his Juzʾ (no. 10). Al-Bazzār said: “This chain of transmission is the best that has been narrated from ʿAmmār on this matter.”
I say: Its narrators are trustworthy and are among the narrators of the two Shaykhs, except for ʿUbayd ibn Salmān al-Agharr, who is truthful. There is also some weakness in al-Fuḍayl ibn Sulaymān al-Numayrī due to his retention, as stated in al-Taqrīb: “Truthful, but makes many errors.”