And Abū Maʿshar, whose name was Nujayḥ al-Sindī, is weak, while all its other narrators are trustworthy. From this, you may see that al-Haythamī’s statement (2/297), following al-Mundhirī (4/164)—

“Reported by Aḥmad and al-Ṭabarānī in al-Kabīr and al-Awsaṭ, and its chain is good”—

is incorrect. I say: It is not good, as you have learned, because of Abū Maʿshar’s weakness and his discrepancy in its chain of transmission.

They also said concerning the hadith of Jābir—which they likewise attributed to al-Bazzār, though I did not find it in his supplementary collection: “Aḥmad’s narrators are the narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ.”

The hadith has a corroborating report narrated by Abū ʿUmārah Qays, the client of Sawdah bint ʿAmr ibn Ḥazm, from his father, from his grandfather, attributed to the Prophet with the same wording, adding: “Then, when he rises to leave him, he continues to wade through it until he returns.” Ibn Abī al-Dunyā recorded it (86/2–87/1), as did al-ʿUqaylī in al-Ḍuʿafāʾ (p. 358).

Al-Bukhārī considered this Abū ʿUmārah very weak, saying: “There is cause for concern regarding him.” Ibn Ḥibbān, however, listed him among the trustworthy narrators. This may be what al-Haythamī relied upon when, after citing the hadith (2/297), he said: “Al-Ṭabarānī reported it in al-Kabīr and al-Awsaṭ, and its narrators have been declared reliable!”

As for al-Mundhirī, he said: “Its chain is closer to being good!” Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr also recorded the hadith in al-Tamhīd (24/273) and declared it authentic.