and he is not unknown; rather, he is known for his honesty, but he has weak memory as I established in the first volume of "al-Ḍaʿīfah," even if this does not please the fanatical followers of the Ḥanafī school and others among those with biases! Therefore, the teacher of Imām Aḥmad, Isḥāq ibn Yūsuf, did not name him, and he did so deliberately as previously mentioned by Aḥmad. The second error is that he misunderstood the ḥāfiẓ, for the complete statement in "Taqrīb" is: "from the third category." Meaning he is from the middle class of the Tābiʿīn who have narrated from some of the Companions, and Abū Ḥanīfah the Imām is not like that, for the ḥāfiẓ mentioned in his biography that he is from the sixth category—meaning from the younger Tābiʿīn who did not meet any of the Companions. And Abū Ḥanīfah the narrator here has two narrators between him and the Companion of the ḥadīth: ʿAlqamah ibn Murthad from Sulaymān ibn Buraydah, so how can it be conceivable that he is the father of ʿAbd al-Akram who narrates from some of the Companions?! This is said if we only consider the book "Taqrīb," but if we refer to "Tahdhīb," you will be more certain of the double error of the shaykh when we find him saying in the biography of the first: "He narrated from Sulaymān ibn Hūd, and his son narrated from him." And it is mentioned in the biography of the Imām that he narrated from a group of them, including ʿAlqamah ibn Murthad! 5 - As for the ḥadīth of Anas, it is narrated by Shabīb ibn Bishr from him, who said: "A man came to the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) asking for a mount, but he did not find anything with him to mount him, so he directed him to another who provided him with a mount. He came to the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) and informed him, and he said..." Then he mentioned it with the wording of the translation with the addition: "Indeed, the one who directs..." It was narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who said: