As for Ibn Zurārah al-Raqqī, a number of trustworthy narrators transmitted from him, and more than one hadith master mentioned him among al-Bukhārī’s teachers. Al-Ḥāfiẓ said:

“Truthful; al-Azdī criticized him without proof.”

Ibn Ḥibbān included him in al-Thiqāt (8/100) and said:

“He died in the year 230 AH.”

This is an omission from al-Ḥāfiẓ’s Tahdhīb, for he did not attribute him to al-Thiqāt at all.

As for Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī al-Ṣāʾigh, al-Ṭabarānī narrated extensively from him among his teachers, transmitting from him approximately one hundred and fifty hadiths in al-Awsaṭ alone. Al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī profiled him in al-Siyar (13/428) as:

“the hadith scholar, the leading authority, the trustworthy narrator …”

From the foregoing explanation of the standing of the narrators in this hadith’s chain of transmission, it is clear that it is an authentic chain, praise be to Allah. Al-Haythamī said in al-Majmaʿ (1/124):

“Al-Ṭabarānī narrated it in al-Awsaṭ. Its chain includes Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbdullāh ibn Zurārah, whom Ibn Ḥibbān deemed trustworthy, while al-Azdī said: ‘His narrations are rejected.’ But al-Azdī’s statement concerning someone like him is not to be heeded, and the rest of its narrators are narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ.”

I say: This authentic hadith escaped al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Mundhirī, who instead cited in al-Targhīb (1/60) al-Bazzār’s hadith from ʿĀʾishah with this wording. He also overlooked that, in its chain as recorded by al-Bazzār (1/82/133), there is Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Malik, from al-Zuhrī, from ʿUrwah, from her. This Muḥammad—namely, Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Malik al-Anṣārī—was a liar, as al-Haythamī stated.