"it is authentic if Thābit ibn ʿUbayd heard it from Zayd ibn Thābit." I said: I do not know what led al-Ḥākim to doubt Thābit's hearing it from Zayd, as he was his patron and was not accused of concealment! Ibn Ḥibbān said in "al-Thiqāt" (1/6): "Thābit ibn ʿUbayd al-Anṣārī, a Kūfan who narrates from ʿUmar and Zayd ibn Thābit, narrated from Ibn Sīrīn and al-Aʿmash, and he is the patron of Zayd ibn Thābit." It has been said that Thābit ibn ʿUbayd al-Anṣārī is different from Thābit ibn ʿUbayd, the patron of Zayd. Abū Ḥātim distinguished between them in "al-Jarḥ wa-al-Taʿdīl" (1/1/454), and al-Ḥāfiẓ attributed this distinction to Ibn Ḥibbān as well, which is an error. Rather, what I quoted from Ibn Ḥibbān earlier indicates no distinction, and this is what al-Ḥāfiẓ relied upon in "al-Taqrīb." Whether it is this or that, both are trustworthy, so the chain is authentic. The ḥadīth was suspended by al-Bukhārī in his "Ṣaḥīḥ," where he said: "Khārijah ibn Zayd ibn Thābit said that Zayd ibn Thābit said that the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) ordered him to learn the script of the Jews." Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar said in his commentary (13/161): "He connected it in detail in (Kitāb al-Tārīkh)." Then Ibn Ḥajar mentioned the other path that was suspended by al-Tirmidhī and then said: "This path came to me with a high chain in 'Faḍāʾil Hilāl al-Ḥaffār.'" It was also narrated by Aḥmad and Isḥāq in their "Musnads," and by Abū Bakr ibn Abī Dāwūd in "Kitāb al-Maṣāḥif" and Abū Yaʿlá, where it is stated: "I write to a people, and I fear they may add or subtract, so learn Syriac." So he mentioned it. There is another path narrated by Ibn Saʿd. In all of this is a refutation of those who claimed that ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Abī al-Zinād was the only one who narrated it. Yes, no one narrated it from his father from Khārijah except ʿAbd al-Raḥmān