hilāl ibn ḥiṣn narrated from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī a story and ḥadīth similar to this, except he said: "And whoever asks us, we do not withhold anything we find from him." al-Ṭabarī recorded it (5/598/6228) through the route of Qatādah from him. Ibn Abī Ḥātim mentioned Hilāl (4/73) with the narration of Abū Ḥamzah from him as well, without mentioning any criticism or endorsement. As for Ibn Ḥibbān, he included him in "al-Thiqāt" (1/280-281 Hindiyyah). Those below him are trustworthy men of the two Shaykhs, except for Bishr—who is Ibn Muʿādh al-ʿAqdī, a shaykh of al-Ṭabarī—and he is trustworthy. Aḥmad also recorded it (3/44) through the route of Abū Ḥamzah from Hilāl ibn Ḥiṣn with a similar narration. This Abū Ḥamzah is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Māzinī, the neighbor of Shuʿbah, and he is trustworthy among the men of Muslim. The scholar Shaykh ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Muʿallimī corrected in his commentary on "al-Tārīkh" (4/2/204) that "Abū Ḥamzah" is a scribal error, and the correct name is "Abū Jamrah": Naṣr ibn ʿImrān al-Ḍubʿī, as al-Mizzī mentioned Hilāl ibn Ḥiṣn among his teachers. I say: This correction is unfounded because all the original sources agree that it is Abū Ḥamzah, and to consider them all mistaken because al-Mizzī mentioned Abū Jamrah with a jīm among Hilāl's teachers does not provide sufficient evidence for the alleged scribal error, as it is possible that both Abū Ḥamzah and Abū Jamrah narrated from Hilāl. And Allāh knows best. The ḥāfiẓ decisively stated in the biography of Abū Ḥamzah in "al-Taʿjīl" that he is known as the neighbor of Shuʿbah, and his name is ʿAbd al-Raḥmān. ʿAṭāʾ ibn Yazīd al-Laythī narrated from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī: