"among the signs of the Hour is that the treacherous will be trusted, and the trustworthy will be deemed treacherous." It was recorded by al-Kharāʾiṭī in "Makārim al-Akhlāq" (p. 31). Its narrators are reliable except for ʿAbd al-Salām, whom I do not know.

"I passed by Gabriel on the night I was taken on the Night Journey among the highest assembly, and he was like a worn-out rug out of fear of Allāh." It was narrated by Muḥammad ibn al-ʿAbbās al-Bazzār in "Ḥadīth" (116/2): ʿAbbās ibn al-Faḍl ibn Rashīd al-Ṭabarī told us, saying: ʿUmar ibn ʿUthmān al-Kilābī told us, saying: ʿUbayd Allāh ibn ʿAmr ibn ʿAbd al-Karīm from ʿAṭāʾ from Jābir as marfūʿ. I said: This isnād is weak; all its narrators are reliable except for ʿAmr ibn ʿUthmān al-Kilābī (the original is ʿUmar as you see, which is an error), and he is weak as mentioned in "Taqrīb." As for ʿAbbās ibn al-Faḍl ibn Rashīd al-Ṭabarī, al-Dāraqutnī said: "Truthful," and he has a biography in "Tārīkh Baghdād" (12/147). Regarding the ḥadīth, al-Suyūṭī said in "al-Khaṣāʾiṣ al-Kubrā" (1/158): "It was recorded by Ibn Mardawayh and al-Ṭabarānī in 'al-Awsaṭ' with a ṣaḥīḥ isnād from Jābir." I said: Perhaps al-Suyūṭī's basis for declaring it ṣaḥīḥ is al-Haythamī's statement in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (1/78): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in 'al-Awsaṭ,' and its narrators are narrators of the ṣaḥīḥ." I said: If this is his basis, it is not strong because the statement of the muḥaddith: "Its narrators are narrators of the ṣaḥīḥ" does not equal his saying: "Its isnād is ṣaḥīḥ," because the former only means that its isnād meets one of the conditions of authenticity, which is that its narrators are reliable narrators of the ṣaḥīḥ, and it does not mean that it is free from..