Muslim (1/42), Abu ‘Awanah (1/7), Abu Ya‘la in his Musnad (2/411–412/1199), and—through his route—Ibn Hibban (8/162/6496), al-Bayhaqi in Dala’il al-Nubuwwah (5/229–230), and Ahmad (3/11) transmitted it through several routes from Abu Mu‘awiyah, from al-A‘mash, from Abu Salih, from Abu Hurayrah or Abu Sa‘id …

Talhah ibn Musarrif followed him, narrating from Abu Salih, from Abu Hurayrah, who said: … and he mentioned it, without expressing any uncertainty.

It was transmitted by Muslim, Abu ‘Awanah, al-Nasa’i in al-Sunan al-Kubra (5/245/8794), and al-Bayhaqi as well (5/228–229 and 6/120–121).

This is the soundly preserved version from al-A‘mash, through the chain previously cited, from Abu Hurayrah without uncertainty. Thus Abu ‘Awanah and al-Nasa’i (8796 and 8797) transmitted it through other routes from al-A‘mash: both of them transmitted it through Qatadah ibn al-Fudayl ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Qatadah, and through ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Abi Hazim, from Suhayl; both from al-A‘mash, with this wording.

Ahmad (2/421–422) also transmitted it through Fulyh, from Suhayl ibn Abi Salih, from Abu Hurayrah, with this wording.

This is how the chain of transmission appears there: he did not mention the intermediary between Suhayl and Abu Hurayrah. It is therefore plainly interrupted, and I do not know whether this was an omission by the copyist or one of Fulyh’s errors.

Moreover, no narrator other than Ahmad is mentioned as having narrated from the narrator in question, Fazārah ibn ‘Amr. Yet Ahmad narrated another hadith from him, from Anas, and al-Husayni said:

“There is reason to question him.”