—a jurist and one of Imam al-Shāfiʿī’s teachers. Some scholars, including Ibn Ḥibbān, declared him trustworthy, though Ibn Ḥibbān indicated that his retention was weak, saying in al-Thiqāt (7/448): “He makes mistakes at times.”

I say: A narrator of his standing may, at the very least, be used in corroboration.

I have found a strong corroborating chain for it. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Uwaysī said: Al-Mājishūn ibn Abī Salamah narrated to us, from Hishām ibn ʿUrwah, with the same chain.

Al-Ḥākim recorded it (3/83), as did al-Bayhaqī from him, and Ibn ʿAsākir through al-Bayhaqī’s route (6/719). Al-Ḥākim said: “Authentic according to the criteria of al-Bukhārī and Muslim.” Al-Dhahabī concurred.

Al-Ḥāfiẓ said in al-Fatḥ (7/48): “Al-Ḥākim recorded it with an authentic chain of transmission.”

It is as he said, for al-Mājishūn is ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Abī Salamah al-Madanī: a trustworthy jurist, among the narrators relied upon by both al-Bukhārī and Muslim. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Uwaysī is trustworthy and one of al-Bukhārī’s teachers. Those below him in the chain are trustworthy, precise narrators.

This corroborating chain was overlooked by the annotator of the Foundation edition of al-Iḥsān (15/306), who confined himself to the apparent weakness in Ibn Ḥibbān’s chain of transmission because of al-Zanjī and al-Farawī.

Once you know of this corroborating narrator, perhaps the surprise mentioned earlier will thereby be removed, for