and its narrators are trustworthy, the narrators of the six [books], except for ʿAbd Rabbih al-Hujaymī. Al-Ḥusaynī said: unknown. Al-Ḥāfiẓ critiqued this in "al-Taʿjīl" and said: I say: this is an error arising from a misreading, and it is actually ʿUbaydah al-Hujaymī. This is how it appears in the original "al-Musnad" from Hushaym from Yūnus ibn ʿUbayd from ʿUbaydah al-Hujaymī from Jābir ibn Sulaym, and from ʿAffān from Ḥammād from Yūnus from ʿUbaydah al-Hujaymī from Abū Tamīmah al-Hujaymī from Jābir ibn Sulaym. Al-Mizzī clarified this difference in his "al-Tahdhīb" in his biography, and he is not unknown, for Abū Dāwūd and al-Nasāʾī narrated from him, and ʿAbd al-Salām Abū al-Khalīl also narrated from him. I say: Al-Ḥāfiẓ did not succeed in removing the anonymity of this al-Hujaymī, for merely being narrated by Abū Dāwūd and al-Nasāʾī does not remove him from the category of unknowns, as is evident. Perhaps al-Ḥāfiẓ meant that he is not unknown in terms of identity because two narrated from him. Interpreting his words in this way is necessary so as not to contradict his statement about him in "al-Taqrīb": that he is "unknown," meaning unknown in terms of reliability. And Allāh knows best. Thus, this isnād is weak due to the anonymity of this al-Hujaymī and its disconnection between him and Jābir ibn Sulaym, as clarified by the narration of Ḥammād from Yūnus mentioned in al-Ḥāfiẓ's words and will appear in "Do not disdain any act of kindness." Moreover, what he claimed about the misreading is contradicted by the fact that al-Marwazī's narration agrees with what is in "al-Musnad." And the ḥadīth, as al-ʿIrāqī said (3/105): "It was narrated by Aḥmad and al-Ṭabarānī with a good isnād." Thus he said. And see "ʿAlayka bi-Taqwá Allāh." I said: