then ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sinān—who is al-Harawī—was corroborated, as Abū Dāwūd said in "Sunan" (4817): Ḥasan ibn ʿĪsá al-Nīsābūrī narrated to us: Ibn al-Mubārak informed us with his isnād from Ibn Ḥujayr al-ʿAdawī who said: I heard ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb with it. I said: Thus it appeared in "Sunan" as (Ibn Ḥujayr) and likewise in "Tahdhīb al-Kamāl" and its branches, and in the narration of al-Bazzār and al-Ṭaḥāwī as (Ibn Ḥujayrah), and similarly in the biography of Isḥāq in "al-Jarḥ wa-al-Taʿdīl." The commentator on "Tahdhīb" asserted that it is a scribal error, but I do not see that as correct because the man is unknown, as al-Mundhirī affirmed in "Mukhtaṣar al-Sunan" (7/181), which aligns with the ḥāfiẓ's statement about him: "obscure." I said he is not well-known and is only recognized in this ḥadīth, so it is not possible to prefer one narration over another! The ḥāfiẓ al-Haythamī made two errors in this ḥadīth: the first was including it while it is in "Sunan." The second was his statement (8/62): "It was narrated by al-Bazzār and its men are the men of the authentic collections except for ʿAbd Allāh ibn Sinān al-Harawī, who is trustworthy," because Ibn Ḥujayrah is not among the men of the authentic collections; rather, he is unknown as mentioned earlier. In my opinion, he mistakenly thought he was ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ḥujayrah al-Khūlānī Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Miṣrī, as he is among the men of Muslim, but he is not him as previously stated, nor did they mention him narrating from ʿUmar or Isḥāq ibn Suwayd narrating from him