and the wording of al-Ḥākim and others is: "he did not raise his head, as if he had already heard it from the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam)," and he said: "Authentic according to the criteria of the two Shaykhs," and al-Dhahabī agreed with him. I said: This is one of their errors, for Ismāʿīl ibn Rajāʾ and his father were not included by al-Bukhārī, so it is according to the criteria of Muslim alone. This error is countered by what al-Haythamī said in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (9/133-134): "Aḥmad narrated it, and its men are the men of the authentic collections, except for Fiṭr ibn Khalīfah, who is trustworthy." I said: It is al-Haythamī's habit in such isnāds to generally state: "Its men are the men of the authentic collections," without exception, because this Fiṭr is among al-Bukhārī's men, except that al-Dāraqutnī said about him: "al-Bukhārī did not rely on him." al-Khazrajī and others explicitly stated that al-Bukhārī narrates from him in conjunction with another, but he has been corroborated as I indicated at the beginning of the takhrīj by saying: "... from various paths," so the ḥadīth is authentic without doubt. (Note): ʿAbd al-Ḥusayn al-Shīʿī made a remarkable blunder in his "Murājaʿāt" (p. 180) in the takhrīj of this ḥadīth, saying after attributing it to al-Ḥākim and Aḥmad: "and it was also narrated by al-Bayhaqī in 'Shuʿab al-Īmān,' Saʿīd ibn Manṣūr in 'Sunan,' Abū Nuʿaym in 'Ḥilyah,' and Abū Yaʿlá in 'Sunan,' 2585 on p. 155 of volume 6 of (al-Kanz)." I said: This indicates his profound ignorance of the books of ḥadīth and his lack of thoroughness, for the ḥadīth in "al-Kanz" he referred to is marked with (Ḥam ʿ H, K Ḥal Ṣ). There is a typographical error in the symbol (H, Ṣ), and the correct one is (Ḥab, Ḍ) as in "al-Jāmiʿ al-Kabīr" by al-Suyūṭī (1/223/2), and based on this error, which the Shīʿī did not notice, came this baseless attribution: "al-Bayhaqī in Shuʿab al-Īmān and Saʿīd ibn Manṣūr in his Sunan"!