if this is clear, then I do not know whether this Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Ibrāhīm ibn ʿArq is another teacher of al-Ṭabarānī or if it is a distortion of his teacher in the two ḥadīths mentioned: Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥārith. Whether it is this or that, I did not find a biography for either of them, so al-Haythamī's statement: "And the isnād of al-Kabīr is good except..." is either disregarding the shaykh or from the perspective of having a good opinion of him, as we have experienced in many of al-Ṭabarānī's ḥadīths. And Allāh knows best. As for its isnād in "al-Awsaṭ," he included it in the biography of Aḥmad ibn al-Naḍr al-ʿAskarī, saying, number (1644 - according to my numbering), Aḥmad narrated to us, saying: Muḥammad ibn Salām al-Manbijī narrated to us, saying: Saʿīd narrated from Ḥabīb ibn Ṣāliḥ al-Ṭāʾī with it. And it contains the addition. And this Saʿīd, I did not recognize him, and al-Mizzī did not mention him among those who narrated from Ḥabīb al-Ṭāʾī. And Muḥammad ibn Salām al-Manbijī is not well-known; I did not find anyone who translated him among the well-known except al-Dhahabī in "al-Mīzān" and "al-Ḍuʿafāʾ," and he did not add more than saying: "Ibn Mandah said: He has oddities." And his biography was omitted from "al-Lisān." Al-Samʿānī mentioned him in the entry (al-Manbijī), saying: "The people of his town narrate wonders about him, he narrated from ʿUmar ibn Saʿīd al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Manbijī with an inverted copy, the mention of which is lengthy, and it is not permissible to use him as evidence or to narrate from him except for acquaintance only." And this is an important benefit absent from the books dedicated to the biographies of narrators. And Allāh is the grantor of success. As for al-Ṭabarānī's teacher Aḥmad ibn al-Naḍr al-ʿAskarī, al-Khaṭīb translated him (5/185-186) and deemed him trustworthy. In summary, the isnād of "al-Kabīr" is better than this, and Allāh knows best. 9 p. 300, ḥadīth 1722