and al-Bayhaqī (1/96) and al-Ṭayālisī (no. 679) and Aḥmad (4/369-373) through the route of Shuʿbah from Qatādah, who heard al-Naḍr ibn Anas from Zayd ibn Arqam, elevated. This isnād is authentic according to the criteria of the two Shaykhs, although some have criticized it, as will be mentioned. Qatādah has another isnād for it, narrated by Saʿīd ibn Abī ʿArūbah from him, from al-Qāsim ibn ʿAwf al-Shaybānī from Zayd ibn Arqam with it. It was recorded by Ibn Mājah and Ibn Ḥibbān (126) and al-Bayhaqī and Aḥmad. This isnād is authentic according to the criteria of Muslim. The ḥadīth was alluded to by al-Tirmidhī (1/11), who criticized it by saying: "There is confusion in its isnād." Hishām al-Dastawāʾī and Saʿīd ibn Abī ʿArūbah narrated from Qatādah; Saʿīd said: from al-Qāsim ibn ʿAwf al-Shaybānī from Zayd ibn Arqam, and Hishām al-Dastawāʾī said from Qatādah from Zayd ibn Arqam, and Shuʿbah and Maʿmar narrated from Qatādah from al-Naḍr ibn Anas; Shuʿbah said: from Zayd ibn Arqam and Maʿmar said from al-Naḍr ibn Anas from his father from the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam). Al-Tirmidhī said: I asked Muḥammad (meaning al-Bukhārī) about this, and he said: "It is possible that Qatādah narrated from both of them." I say: What al-Bukhārī mentioned is what we confidently assert, that Qatādah narrated from al-Naḍr ibn Anas and from al-Qāsim ibn ʿAwf al-Shaybānī, both from Zayd ibn Arqam. This is because Qatādah is a trustworthy, reliable, and precise memorizer, and it is possible for someone like him to have more than one isnād for a ḥadīth. If that is the case, we do not see the ḥadīth being criticized for something that is possible and indeed occurs in many ḥadīths, as attested by those experienced in this field. Moreover, we do not accept the judgment of the ḥadīth as confused merely due to the mentioned difference, because the condition for a ḥadīth to be considered confused is that the narrations are equal such that none is preferred over the others by any means of preference, such as the memorization of its narrator, his precision, his frequent companionship, or other means. If one narration is preferred over the others, then the ruling is for it, and it is not described as confused, or at least it does not have the ruling of confusion, as Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ mentioned in the introduction. The preference—if necessary—in this ḥadīth is clear, as Saʿīd ibn Abī ʿArūbah and Hishām al-Dastawāʾī are the most reliable people regarding Qatādah