" Minhal ibn Khalīfah, Yaḥyá said: weak, and al-Bukhārī said: "there is some doubt about him," and he is not followed upon it except by a similar route, and this is only narrated as mursal." I said: and it seems he is referring to the first route, which is better than this one as you can see, for Salām is considered reliable by a group and his ḥadīth is good, unlike Minhal, for the majority consider him weak, and al-Bukhārī weakened him greatly with his previous statement. As for the mursal that he referred to, I did not find it, but I found a connected witness for it from the ḥadīth of Anas, and there are two routes from him: the first is from ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan al-Shāmī from Khulayd ibn Daʿlaj from Qatādah from Anas as marfūʿ. It was extracted by Ibn ʿAsākir in "Madḥ al-Tawāḍuʿ" (p. 89/1/2) and he said: this is a good and rare ḥadīth, unique to ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan from Khulayd ibn Daʿlaj, and it has been narrated from Anas through another route." I said: how can it be good when ʿAlī ibn al-Ḥasan is accused, Ibn Ḥibbān said: "it is not permissible to write his ḥadīth except out of amazement," and Ibn ʿAdī said after mentioning several of his ḥadīths: "all of them are not preserved, they are falsehoods, and all his ḥadīth is very weak." Al-Dāraqutnī said: "he lies, narrating falsehoods from trustworthy narrators," and al-Ḥākim said: "he narrated fabricated ḥadīths." I said: someone like him should not be used as a witness for his ḥadīth, let alone be used as evidence or have his ḥadīth considered good. Then Ibn ʿAsākir narrated from the other route, which is from the path of al-Zubayr ibn Bakkār: "Abū..