I say: This additional link is closer to what is correct. Perhaps Ibn Abī Ghaniyyah was inconsistent in its chain of transmission: he would mention it at times and omit it at others. For although he was trustworthy, Muslim relied upon him, and al-Bukhārī recorded him alongside another narrator—as stated in al-Mīzān—Ibn ʿAdī said in al-Kāmil (7/210):

“Some of what he narrates is not corroborated, though he is among those whose hadith may be recorded.”

Moreover, the omission cannot be attributed to Imam Aḥmad, for he was an authority in memorization and precision; and because Ibn Abān, who narrated this additional link from him, was also trustworthy.

We have said that the additional link is closer to what is correct because it has, in general, been corroborated. Al-Bukhārī recorded it in al-Tārīkh (4/1/430/1890), as did al-Bazzār (2/278/1700), through two routes from ʿUqbah ibn al-Mughīrah, who said: Isḥāq ibn Abī Isḥāq al-Shaybānī narrated to me from his father, from al-Mukhāriq ibn Sulaym, who said:

“I saw ʿAmmār on the Day of al-Jamal …” The hadith.

Al-Bazzār said:

“We know of no narration of it from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, except through this chain of transmission.”

I say: It is good, Allah willing. Since the two reliable authorities concur upon it, it is nevertheless necessary to discuss its narrators, if only briefly. Thus I say:

As for ʿUqbah ibn al-Mughīrah, he was truthful. Ibn Ḥibbān declared him trustworthy, and a number of narrators transmitted from him, as I previously established in al-Ḍaʿīfah under hadith no. 6035.

His teacher, Isḥāq ibn Abī Isḥāq al-Shaybānī, was similarly graded, as you will see there.

As for his father—whose name was Sulaymān ibn Abī Sulaymān al-Shaybānī—he was trustworthy and among the narrators relied upon by both al-Bukhārī and Muslim.