(3/90/2) from al-Thawrī, from Ibn Khuthaym or from al-ʿAlāʾ - Abū Bakr was uncertain - from Abū al-Ṭufayl, from Ibn ʿAbbās who said: I heard him say: and he mentioned it. I said: And this isnād is good, its men are trustworthy, the men of Muslim, except for the uncertainty regarding al-Thawrī's shaykh, whether he is Ibn Khuthaym - whose name is ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUthmān al-Makkī, and he is truthful among the men of Imām Muslim - or he is al-ʿAlāʾ? So we looked and found that al-Azraqī had recorded it in "Akhbār Makkah" (p. 391) through another route, and he said: Muḥammad ibn Yaḥyá narrated to me from Salīm ibn Muslim, from Sufyān al-Thawrī, from al-ʿAlāʾ ibn Abī al-ʿAbbās, from Abū al-Ṭufayl with it. This suggests that the shaykh is al-ʿAlāʾ ibn Abī al-ʿAbbās, and he is trustworthy, trustworthy as Ibn Maʿīn said, as narrated by Ibn Abī Ḥātim (3/1/356), but Salīm ibn Muslim - who is al-Khashshāb - is abandoned in ḥadīth as al-Nasāʾī said. Aḥmad said: "His ḥadīth is worth nothing." I said: So such a case does not provide preference, thus the uncertainty remains, but it does not cast weakness on the isnād, because the uncertainty revolves between two trustworthy individuals, the most it does is prevent us from stating that its men are the men of "al-Ṣaḥīḥ." Therefore, al-Haythamī said (3/286): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Kabīr", and its men are trustworthy." For this is true whether the shaykh is Ibn Khuthaym or al-ʿAlāʾ, and al-Mundhirī said in "al-Targhīb" (2/133): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Kabīr", and it is mawqūf with a ṣaḥīḥ isnād." (Benefit) Abū Bakr who was uncertain about the isnād of the ḥadīth is ʿAbd al-Razzāq himself, the author of "al-Muṣannaf." And most of it is from the narration of Abū Yaʿqūb Isḥāq ibn Ibrāhīm al-Dabarī from him, for I saw some of his books from the narration of others than al-Dabarī from him, for example, the book "Ahl al-Kitāb" is..