was through another chain from ʿUbadah! Nevertheless, I said that he corroborates Ibn Lahiʿah because he belonged to Ibn Lahiʿah’s generation and died before him—by approximately ten years. Moreover, there is disagreement concerning him, as was mentioned above from al-Haythami. Al-Hafiz said in al-Taqrib:

“Truthful, but poor in retention and prone to errors.”

Thus, someone like him may likewise be cited in corroboration.

Al-Mundhiri also cited the hadith in al-Targhib, with a more complete wording as well, similar to that in al-Majmaʿ. He said (2/176):

“Ahmad and al-Tabarani reported it through two chains of transmission, one of which is good; this is its wording.”

I do not know which of the two chains is good! But there is no doubt that it is at least good in light of both chains together, let alone when what we have previously mentioned is added to them.

As for the annotators of the new edition of al-Targhib, they paid no attention to al-Mundhiri’s explicit grading of it as good, nor to the combined strength of the two routes, nor even to al-Haythami’s remarks—though, as is their habit, they quoted them from him. They introduced this by saying: “Weak”!! *

3335—“The spoils of gatherings of remembrance: Paradise.”

Ahmad recorded it (2/177 and 190) through two routes from Ibn Lahiʿah: Rashid ibn Yahya al-Maʿafiri narrated to us that he heard Abu ʿAbd al-Rahman al-Hubuli narrating from ʿAbdullah ibn ʿAmr, who said: I said, “O Messenger of Allah, what are the spoils of gatherings of remembrance?” He said: … Then he mentioned it.