al-Hudhail from Khabbāb from the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam). Abū Nuʿaym said: "This is a rare narration from al-Ajlah and al-Thawrī, exclusively reported by Abū Aḥmad." I said: This isnād is good; its narrators are trustworthy, the narrators of Muslim except for al-Ajlah, who is Ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Ḥujayyah, and he is truthful as stated by al-Dhahabī in "al-Ḍuʿafāʾ" and al-Ḥāfiẓ in "al-Taqrīb." There is no fault in him except that he is Shīʿī, but that does not harm the narration because the main criterion is truthfulness, as clarified by al-Ḥāfiẓ in "Sharḥ al-Nukhbah." Al-Haythamī said in "al-Majmaʿ" (1/189): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in 'al-Kabīr' and its narrators are reliable, and there is a difference of opinion regarding al-Ajlah al-Kindī, but most consider him reliable." The ḥadīth was mentioned by ʿAbd al-Ḥaqq al-Ishbīlī in "al-Aḥkām" (Q 8/1) and he said: "It was narrated by al-Bazzār from the ḥadīth of Sharīk - who is Ibn ʿAbd Allāh - from Abū Sinān from Abū - perhaps from Ibn Abī - al-Hudhail from Khabbāb as marfūʿ, and he said: This isnād is good, as he said, but it is not one that can be used as evidence." I said: That is due to the weakness of Sharīk ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Qāḍī, but the first path supports and strengthens it. Al-Haythamī did not mention it in "Kashf al-Astār ʿan Zawāʾid al-Bazzār," so perhaps it is in a work other than his "Musnad." (They narrated) He said in "al-Nihāyah": In a narration: "When they perished, they narrated," meaning they relied on speech and abandoned action, which was the cause of their destruction, or vice versa, when they perished due to abandoning action, they clung to stories. And I say: It is possible to say that the cause of their destruction was their preachers' focus on stories and tales instead of beneficial fiqh and knowledge that acquaints people with their religion, prompting them to act