"accepted." And his son Khabīb is unknown. Jaʿfar ibn Saʿd ibn Sumrah is not strong. And Sulaymān ibn Mūsá Abū Dāwūd al-Kūfī al-Khurāsānī has some weakness. From this, you learn the error of al-Munāwī in his statement in "al-Taysīr": "And its chain is good." Even though in "al-Fayḍ," he criticized al-Suyūṭī's indication of its goodness due to the weakness of this Sulaymān! I said: But it has another route that strengthens it, as al-Ḥākim narrated it (2/141-142) from Isḥāq ibn Idrīs who reported from Hammām, from Qatādah, from al-Ḥasan, from Sumrah in a marfūʿ form with the wording: "Do not dwell with the polytheists nor gather with them, for whoever dwells with them or gathers with them is not from us." And he said: "Authentic according to the criteria of al-Bukhārī," and al-Dhahabī agreed with him, but he added: "and Muslim." I do not know if this addition is from him or from some copyists of his book "al-Talkhīṣ." Whether it is this or that, their authentication is a gross error because Isḥāq ibn Idrīs is not among the narrators of the two Shaykhs, nor is he trustworthy. In fact, he was accused of fabricating ḥadīth, as al-Dhahabī himself mentioned in "al-Mīzān" and said: "Ibn al-Madīnī abandoned him, and Abū Zurʿah said: weak. Al-Bukhārī said: people abandoned him. Al-Dāraquṭnī said: his ḥadīth is rejected. And Yaḥyá ibn Maʿīn said: a liar who fabricates ḥadīth." But I found a strong corroborator for him, narrated by Isḥāq ibn Sayyār who reported from Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Malik from Hammām with it