the first because Ayyūb corroborated them from Abū al-ʿAlāʾ with it. But al-Ḥasan—meaning al-Baṣrī—disagreed with him and said: from Muṭarrif ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Shikhkhīr from his father, elevated with it. It was recorded by Aḥmad (4/25) and from him by al-Ḍiyāʾ in "al-Mukhtārah" (58/182/2), Ibn Mājah (2502), Ibn Ḥibbān (1171), Ibn Saʿd (7/34), Abū ʿUbayd in "Gharīb al-Ḥadīth" (5/1), al-Bayhaqī (6/191), and also al-Ḍiyāʾ through the path of Ḥumayd al-Ṭawīl from him. And Qatādah corroborated him from Muṭarrif with it. It was recorded by Abū Nuʿaym in "al-Ḥilyah" (9/33) and al-Ḍiyāʾ. Perhaps this narration from Muṭarrif from his father is more likely than the narration of Muṭarrif from Abū Muslim al-Judhāmī from al-Jārūd because two reliable narrators, al-Ḥasan and Qatādah, agreed upon it, unlike the other, which was singularly narrated by Abū al-ʿAlāʾ as you have seen. If that is the case, then the isnād is authentic, whereas the path of Abū Muslim is not well-known. However, it was not singularly narrated by him, as al-Ṭabarānī recorded it (3/102/1-2) through the path of Abū Maʿshar al-Barāʾ, who informed us from al-Muthanná ibn Saʿīd from Qatādah from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Bābī from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr that al-Jārūd Abū al-Mundhir informed him with it. I said: This is a strong corroboration and the isnād is good, and it meets the criteria of Muslim. And the ḥadīth has a supporting narration from ʿIṣmah, elevated with it, and it adds: