“As for Sa‘id ibn Salamah, his narration was corroborated by Abu Kathir al-Jallah, who also narrated it from him. Al-Layth ibn Sa‘d, ‘Amr ibn al-Harith, and others narrated from him; and through al-Layth, Ahmad, al-Hakim, and al-Bayhaqi narrated it from him.”

I say: This means that al-Jallah also narrated it from Sa‘id ibn Salamah, so that Sa‘id had two narrators from him: Safwan and al-Jallah.

Accordingly, attributing this corroboration to Ahmad is questionable, for Ahmad’s chain of transmission (2/378) is as follows: “Qutaybah ibn Sa‘id narrated to us from al-Layth, from Abu Kathir al-Jallah, from al-Mughirah ibn Abi Burdah, from Abu Hurayrah ...”

Thus, in this wording, al-Jallah corroborates Sa‘id ibn Salamah, not Safwan, as al-Hafiz—may Allah have mercy on him—claimed. His claim is valid, however, in view of al-Hakim’s version of the chain of transmission (1/141), from whom al-Bayhaqi received it (1/3). He narrated it through ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Abd al-Wahid ibn Sharik, who said: Yahya ibn Bukayr narrated to us: al-Layth informed me, from Yazid ibn Abi Habib, who said: Abu Kathir al-Jallah informed me that Ibn Salamah al-Makhzumi had narrated to him that al-Mughirah ibn Abi Burdah informed him of it.

This version differs from Ahmad’s version in two respects:

First, it inserts Yazid ibn Abi Habib between al-Layth and al-Jallah, whereas the former omits him between them.

Second, it inserts Sa‘id ibn Salamah al-Makhzumi between al-Jallah and al-Mughirah, whereas the other omits him.

At first glance, this discrepancy appears to be between Qutaybah ibn Sa‘id and Yahya ibn Bukayr. Had this discrepancy been established from Yahya, it would have been outweighed, for he was inferior to Qutaybah in retention