I said: This is a good isnād, all its men are reliable according to "al-Tahdhīb," although there is some discussion about some of them, except for ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-Ṣamad, who is Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ṭayālisī known as "ʿAllān Māghamah." Al-Khaṭīb mentioned him and said (12/28): "He was trustworthy, he died in the year 289." He was followed by Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn Suhayl al-Ḥaṣīb, who narrated to us from Abū Hammām al-Walīd ibn Shujāʿ in a summarized form. Al-Khaṭīb extracted it (3/71-72) through the route of Abū al-Fatḥ Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥusayn al-Azdī from him, and said: "Al-Azdī said: This shaykh was not satisfactory; he stole it, it is with ʿAlī ibn Aḥmad ibn al-Naḍr, and its origin from Shuʿbah is false, it is only from al-Ḥasan ibn ʿUmārah." I said: This is what al-Azdī said, and it is refuted by the corroboration of ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-Ṣamad, the trustworthy, for Muḥammad ibn ʿAlī ibn Suhayl al-Ḥaṣīb, thus eliminating the suspicion of his theft, and al-Azdī's criticism of him for theft is dismissed, especially since al-Azdī himself is criticized regarding his memory!

"The example of one who takes back what he has given is like a dog that vomits and then eats its vomit. If the giver takes back, he should be stopped, made aware of what he has taken back, and then he should return what he has given." It was extracted by Abū Dāwūd (2/109) and Aḥmad (2/175) from Usāmah ibn Zayd that ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb narrated to him from his father from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr in a marfūʿ form. I said: This is a good isnād according to what is established about ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb from his father from his grandfather. And Usāmah ibn Zayd is al-Laythī, their client, Abū Zayd, whereas al-ʿAdawī is weak.