this is established, so the isnād is authentic but mursal. and al-Ḥasan ibn ʿAlī ibn ʿUthmān, I suspect it is ibn ʿAffān, which was altered by the copyist to ibn ʿUthmān, and ibn ʿAffān is trustworthy. and the ḥadīth has a corroborating narration from Ibn ʿUmar with a good isnād, previously referenced under number (906).

- "Among the signs of the Hour is the swelling of the crescents, and that the crescent is seen on the first night and it is said: it is two nights old." It was recorded by al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Muʿjam al-Ṣaghīr" (p. 182, no. 1130 - al-Rawḍ al-Naḍīr) and also in "al-Awsaṭ" (2/130/1/7007) and "Musnad al-Shāmiyyīn" (p. 642): Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn al-Azraq al-Anṭākī - in Antioch - narrated to us: My father narrated to us, Mubashshir ibn Ismāʿīl narrated to us from Shuʿayb ibn Abī Ḥamzah from al-ʿAlāʾ ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān from his father from Abū Hurayrah who said: The Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said it, and he said: "Mubashshir was the sole narrator of it." I said: He is trustworthy, from the narrators of the two Shaykhs [al-Bukhārī and Muslim], as are those above him, so the isnād is good except that I do not know al-Anṭākī and his father, and they are according to the criteria of Ibn ʿAsākir in "Tārīkh Dimashq" but I did not find them in it, and in the Ẓāhiriyyah manuscript, there is a gap. However, it appears from al-Ṭabarānī's linking of the uniqueness to Mubashshir ibn Ismāʿīl that his teacher and father did not uniquely narrate it. And Allāh knows best. In "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (3/146): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Ṣaghīr", and in it is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn al-Azraq al-Anṭākī, and I did not find anyone who documented him." I said: It was also omitted in "al-Awsaṭ", and we benefited from it in correcting the name of Ibn Muḥammad, the teacher of al-Ṭabarānī, as it appeared in the printed copies of "al-Ṣaghīr": "ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn