ʿUrwah from her. Ibn Ḥibbān and Ibn ʿAdī mentioned that he was unique in narrating it. Al-Bukhārī said: It is a rejected ḥadīth. However, al-Ṭabarānī narrated it through the route of Yaʿqūb ibn Mujāhid from ʿUrwah and said: "No one narrated it from ʿUrwah except Yaʿqūb and ʿAbd al-Wāḥid." 2 - Among them is from Abū Umāmah. Al-Ṭabarānī and al-Bayhaqī in "al-Zuhd" narrated it with a weak chain. 3 - Among them is from ʿAlī, as narrated by al-Ismāʿīlī in "Musnad ʿAlī". 4 - And from Ibn ʿAbbās. Al-Ṭabarānī narrated it, and their chain is weak. 5 - And from Anas, narrated by Abū Yaʿlá, al-Bazzār, and al-Ṭabarānī. Its chain is also weak. 6 - And from Ḥudhayfah. Al-Ṭabarānī narrated it in a shortened form. Its chain is good but rare. 7 - And from Muʿādh ibn Jabal. Narrated by Ibn Mājah and Abū Nuʿaym in "al-Ḥilyah" in a shortened form, and its chain is also weak. 8 - And from Wahb ibn Munabbih, cut off. Narrated by Aḥmad in "al-Zuhd" and Abū Nuʿaym in "al-Ḥilyah". There is a critique of Ibn Ḥibbān where he said after narrating the ḥadīth of Abū Hurayrah: "This ḥadīth is known only through two routes - meaning other than the ḥadīth of the chapter - which are Hishām al-Kinānī from Anas, and ʿAbd al-Wāḥid ibn Maymūn from ʿUrwah from ʿĀʾishah, and neither is authentic." All of this is the speech of the ḥāfiẓ. He elaborated extensively on it, and rightly so, for a ḥadīth that Imām al-Bukhārī includes in "al-Musnad al-Ṣaḥīḥ" is not easily dismissed for mere weakness in its chain, as it may have supporting evidence that strengthens it. So, is this ḥadīth like that? The ḥāfiẓ presented these eight pieces of supporting evidence and asserted that their totality indicates it has a basis. Since one of the conditions for supporting evidence is that its weakness should not be severe, otherwise the ḥadīth cannot be strengthened by it, as established by scholars in "the science of ḥadīth terminology", it is also necessary that their testimony be complete,