through routes from Muḥammad ibn Abī al-Sarrī, with this chain. Al-Haythamī said in al-Majmaʿ (8/26–27): “Al-Ṭabarānī recorded it, and it contains ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn Suwwār, who is weak.”

Al-Mundhirī indicated in al-Targhīb (3/354) that it was weak, stating: “Al-Ṭabarānī recorded it in abbreviated form, as did Abū al-Shaykh in al-Thawāb; its wording is his.”

I say: This narration of al-Fasawī is similar.

Al-Haythamī confined his criticism to the defect of ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd, but this is inadequate. For the narrator from him, Bakr ibn Bishr al-ʿAsqalānī—also called al-Tirmidhī—was mentioned by Ibn Abī Ḥātim (1/1/382) with this very narration, and he said: “I heard my father say: He is unknown.”

The same was stated in al-Mīzān.

As for Ibn Ḥibbān, he listed him in al-Thiqāt (8/148), likewise solely on the basis of Ibn Abī al-Sarrī’s narration, and no other.

Muḥammad ibn Abī al-Sarrī, moreover, has been criticized with regard to his retention. Al-Ḥāfiẓ said: “Truthful and knowledgeable, but prone to many errors.”

In short, the chain of transmission is weak and cannot serve as proof.

However, I found another route through which the hadith is authenticated; it is one of the precious finds, all praise be to Allah. Al-Dārimī, may Allah have mercy on him, said in his Sunan (1/129–130): “Al-Ḥusayn ibn Manṣūr informed us: Abū Usāmah narrated to us: Abū Ghifār al-Muthannā ibn Saʿīd al-Ṭāʾī narrated to me: ʿAwn ibn...”