and al-Ḥākim said: "This ḥadīth is authentic according to the criteria of Muslim." Al-Dhahabī agreed with him. I said: Ibn Isḥāq was only included by Muslim as a corroborative narrator, and he is known for tadlīs [obfuscating the source of his ḥadīth], yet he explicitly stated his narration in one of Aḥmad's two narrations, so its isnād is good, as also stated by al-Ḥāfiẓ in "al-Fatḥ" (9/156). He said in "al-Talkhīṣ": "Ibn al-Qaṭṭān criticized it due to Wāqid ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, saying: the known [narrator] is Wāqid ibn ʿAmr." I said: In al-Ḥākim's narration, it is from Wāqid ibn ʿAmr, and it is the same with al-Shāfiʿī and ʿAbd al-Razzāq. I say: And it is likewise with all those we mentioned except for Abū Dāwūd and Aḥmad in his other narration, who said: "Wāqid ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān." ʿAbd al-Wāḥid ibn Ziyād was unique in this, contrary to those who said: "Wāqid ibn ʿAmr," who are more numerous, and their narration is preferred. Wāqid ibn ʿAmr is a reliable narrator from the men of Muslim, whereas Wāqid ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān is unknown. And Allāh knows best. The fiqh of the ḥadīth: The ḥadīth clearly indicates what we have translated for, and it is supported by the practice of its narrator, the noble Companion Jābir ibn ʿAbd Allāh (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu). Muḥammad ibn Maslamah did likewise, as we mentioned in the preceding ḥadīth, and their actions suffice as evidence. We are not harmed thereafter by the opinion of those who restrict the ḥadīth to looking at the face and hands only, as it is a restriction without a restrictive text, and an obstruction of the Companions' understanding without evidence, especially since it is supported by the action of the rightly-guided caliph ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu). Al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Talkhīṣ" (p. 291-292): (Benefit): ʿAbd al-Razzāq and Saʿīd ibn Manṣūr narrated in "his Sunan" (520 -