Thus he said—may Allah guide him—while disregarding the following facts:

First: A number of trustworthy narrators also narrated from this ‘Abd al-Raḥmān. Ibn Ḥibbān declared him trustworthy, Maslamah placed him in the first rank of the Successors, and every hadith master who explicitly affirmed the authenticity of his hadith—many of whom will be named shortly—also declared him trustworthy, apart from the three named by this obstinate man. Al-Dhahabī likewise stated in al-Kāshif that he was “truthful.”

Second: He was not alone in narrating it. Al-Ḥākim said (1/97):

“Two trustworthy, highly reliable leading scholars of Syria—Ḥujr ibn Ḥujr al-Kilāʿī and Yaḥyā ibn Abī al-Muṭāʿ al-Qurashī—corroborated ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn ‘Amr in his narration from al-‘Irbāḍ.”

He then cited his chain of transmission to them and said afterward:

“This hadith is authentic, and praise be to Allah.”

Al-Dhahabī concurred with him.

I say: Its chain of transmission to Yaḥyā al-Qurashī is authentic. He is trustworthy, and he explicitly stated that he heard it directly from al-‘Irbāḍ, as recorded by al-Ḥākim, Ibn Mājah, and Ibn Abī ‘Āṣim as well.

Third: Besides those already mentioned, a number of hadith masters declared the hadith authentic, such as al-Bazzār, who said:

“A sound, authentic hadith.”

And al-Harawī, in Censure of Speculative Theology, who said: “This is among the finest hadiths of the people of Syria.”