I say: Al-Ḥāfiẓ did not grade it authentic, despite all its narrators being trustworthy narrators of Muslim, because Sa‘d al-Anṣārī is disputed. Aḥmad said: “Weak.” Ibn Ma‘īn said the same in one report, while in another he said: “Sound.” Al-Nasā’ī said: “He is not strong.” Ibn Sa‘d said: “He was trustworthy, but narrated few hadiths.” Al-Tirmidhī said: “They criticized him on account of his retention.” Ibn Ḥibbān included him in al-Thiqāt (4/298) and said: “He used to err.”

I say: For this reason, al-Dhahabī included him in his aforementioned treatise, al-Mutakallam fīhim (111/141). Thus, the hadith of one like him is good, Allah willing, and so it is a sound supporting report. Al-Sarrāj also transmitted it in his Musnad (fol. 120/1), as did al-Ṭabarānī in al-Mu‘jam al-Kabīr (7/184–185), through other chains from Sa‘īd, in an abridged form. Al-Haythamī (2/155) said: “Al-Ṭabarānī narrated it in al-Kabīr, and its narrators are the narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ.”

It has another supporting report, but it is not one to be pleased with, because of the extreme weakness of its narrator, who is ‘Amr ibn