Even so, we can state with certainty that this does not impair the soundness of the chain of transmission, since the uncertainty lies between two trustworthy narrators, as mentioned above. Thus, there is no harm whether it was this one or that one. And Allah knows best.

As for the annotator’s statement in Sharḥ al-Sunnah: “Its chain of transmission is authentic and strong according to the criteria of al-Bukhārī and those who followed him, such as al-Tirmidhī, Ibn Ḥibbān, and al-Ḥākim; but it is weak according to the criteria of Aḥmad, al-Dāraquṭnī, and others,” I say: This statement lacks proper verification for several reasons.

First, he has not stated his own view concerning the hadith’s chain of transmission and text—whether authenticating it or declaring it weak. Second, one cannot definitively assert that its chain is authentic according to al-Bukhārī’s criteria, for this would require all its narrators to be deemed trustworthy by al-Bukhārī, including Bashīr ibn Salmān. Although a number of scholars did declare him trustworthy, they did not include al-Bukhārī among them. Nor does al-Bukhārī’s silence regarding him in al-Tārīkh (1/2/99), or his narration from him in al-Adab al-Mufrad, entail that he considered him trustworthy, as is well known to scholars—contrary to the claims of certain sectarian partisans among the Ibāḍīs and others.

Third, the converse applies to his attribution of weakness according to the criteria of Aḥmad and al-Dāraquṭnī: this would only be valid if the two of them held Sayyār Abū Ḥamzah to be weak or unknown. Far from it; nothing of the sort has been reported from either of them. So consider this carefully.

There is also another discrepancy among the narrators concerning the statement at the end of the hadith: “either through an imminent death or immediate prosperity.” It appears in several forms. The first is the wording found in the hadith under discussion: