As for the first report, al-Haythami says in Majmaʿ al-Zawaʾid (2/79–80): “It was transmitted by Ahmad, Abu Yaʿla and al-Tabarani in al-Awsat, and Ahmad’s chain is hasan.” So he stated. In the Musnad (2/265) it appears with the isnad of Muhammad b. Fudayl, who said: “Yazid b. Abi Ziyad narrated to us from a man who heard Abu Hurayrah…”; and again (2/311) through Sharik, from Yazid b. Abi Ziyad, from Mujahid, from Abu Hurayrah. This chain is weak and cannot legitimately be raised to the level of hasan, for the pivot of the isnad is Yazid b. Abi Ziyad, well known for poor memory. Al-Taqrib describes him: “Weak; when he grew old his memory deteriorated, he had to be prompted, and he was a Shiʿi.” Moreover, Muhammad b. Fudayl and Sharik differ over the intermediary: the former leaves him unnamed, whereas the latter identifies him as Mujahid. Sharik himself also had a poor memory. There is a supporting route from Mujahid through Layth b. Abi Sulaym, cited by al-Bayhaqi, who comments: “Layth is not proof-worthy.” Al-Taqrib likewise says: “Trustworthy, but he became confused late in life; his narrations are indistinguishable and therefore were abandoned.” (The Shaykh later graded the hadith hasan on the strength of corroborating chains; see Sahih al-Targhib, no. 555.) Regarding the hadith of Samurah, it was recorded by al-Hakim (1/272) and al-Bayhaqi with the chain: Saʿid b. Abi ʿArubah — Qatadah — al-Hasan — Samurah. Al-Hakim declared it “sound according to al-Bukhari’s criteria,” and al-Dhahabi concurred—such were their words.