it is added at the end of the discussion: I said: The ḥadīth has two supporting witnesses that strengthen it: one is from the ḥadīth of ʿĀʾishah (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhā). The other is from the ḥadīth of Ḥakīm ibn Ḥizām (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu). Their extraction and the discussion on their isnāds have been previously mentioned in the third volume: (1059 and 1060). 10 p. 305, ḥadīth 1727. I said: And the narration of ʿAbd al-Razzāq in "al-Muṣannaf" (5/382-383) is from Maʿmar as a mursal like the narration of al-Bazzār. Then the volume containing the ḥadīths of Kaʿb ibn Mālik from "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr" by al-Ṭabarānī was published, and I found the ḥadīth in it (19/71/139) through the route of Muḥammad ibn Abī ʿUmar al-ʿAdanī: ʿAbd al-Razzāq narrated to us with it, except that he said: from Ibn Kaʿb ibn Mālik from his father who said: Malāʿib al-Asinnah came... the ḥadīth. So he mentioned it as connected. And this al-ʿAdanī is Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyá ibn Abī ʿUmar, attributed to his grandfather, and he is one of the shaykhs of Muslim, but Abū Ḥātim said: He had negligence. So his opposition is not used as proof. Likewise, it was connected (number 138) through the route of Aḥmad ibn Abī Bakr al-Bālisī: Muḥammad ibn Muṣʿab narrated to us: al-Awzāʿī narrated to us from al-Zuhrī with it. But Muḥammad ibn Muṣʿab—who is al-Qurqusānī—is weak due to his frequent mistakes, and al-Bālisī is worse than him. And the connected narration of Ibn al-Mubārak was extracted in it with number (162) through the route of Muḥammad ibn Muqātil al-Marwazī: ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Mubārak narrated to us with it