I said: And this Ibrāhīm is weak, and even if it were authentic from Wahb, it would not be suitable for testimony, because it is explicitly among the Isrāʾīliyyāt, which we are commanded neither to believe nor disbelieve. Similar to it is what Abū al-Faḍl al-Muqri al-Rāzī narrated in "Aḥādīth fī Dhamm al-Kalām" (204/1) from Muḥammad ibn Kathīr al-Ṣanʿānī from al-Awzāʿī from Ḥassān ibn ʿAṭiyyah who said: "Allāh said..." and he mentioned the ḥadīth in a similar manner, disconnected and suspended. The ḥadīth of Maymūnah, may Allāh have mercy on him, was missed by the ḥāfiẓ, and it is elevated with its entirety like the ḥadīth of al-Ṭabarānī from ʿĀʾishah. It was recorded by Abū Yaʿlá in "Musnad" (334/1) and Abū Bakr al-Kalābādhī in "Miftāḥ al-Maʿānī" (13/1, no. 15) from Yūsuf ibn Khālid al-Samtī who narrated to us from ʿUmar ibn Isḥāq that he heard ʿAṭāʾ ibn Yasār narrating from her. But this isnād is very weak because al-Samtī, as the ḥāfiẓ said, "They abandoned him, and Ibn Maʿīn declared him a liar." Thus, it is not suitable for testimony at all. Al-Haythamī said: "It was narrated by Abū Yaʿlá, and in it is Yūsuf ibn Khālid al-Samtī, and he is a liar." In summary, most of these supporting evidences are not suitable to strengthen the ḥadīth with them, either due to the severe weakness of its isnād or due to its brevity, except for the ḥadīth of ʿĀʾishah and the ḥadīth of Anas through its two paths. If they are combined with the isnād of the ḥadīth of Abū Hurayrah, the ḥadīth is supported by their totality and elevated to the level of ṣaḥīḥ, if Allāh wills, and it has been authenticated by the scholars previously mentioned. (Note) It is mentioned in the book "Mabāriq al-Azhār Sharḥ Mashāriq al-Anwār" (in the eleventh chapter on the divine words (2/338) that this ḥadīth was recorded by al-Bukhārī from Anas and Abū Hurayrah with the wording: