and the wording is from al-Bukhārī, and al-Mukhliṣ said: "and mentioned Allāh" instead of: "does not engage in idle talk." Al-Mundhirī said (2/121) and was followed by al-Haythamī (3/245): "And its men are trustworthy!" Thus they said, but I see two issues: the first is the disconnection, for this al-Munkadir—who is Ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Hudayr al-Tamīmī—although al-Ṭabarānī and others included him among the Companions, this has not been established. Ibn Abī Ḥātim said (4/1/406): "He narrated from the Prophet ﷺ but his companionship is not established, and from ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb." Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr said in "al-Istīʿāb" (4/1486): "His ḥadīth is considered disconnected by them, and his companionship is not established, but he was born during the time of the Prophet ﷺ." Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in "Thiqāt al-Tābiʿīn" (3/265). I said: So it is surprising how al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar remained silent about this fact, not addressing it in the biography of al-Munkadir in "al-Iṣābah" after mentioning that al-Ṭabarānī and others included him among the Companions. The second issue is the unknown status of this al-Munkadir, as Ibn Abī Ḥātim did not mention anyone narrating from him except his nephew ʿAbd Allāh ibn Rabīʿah ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Hudayr. And Ibn Ḥibbān said: "His son Muḥammad ibn al-Munkadir narrated from him," and added nothing more. Thus, he is a tābiʿī of unknown condition, so the ḥadīth is disconnected, but it is acceptable in supporting evidence, as the rest of the men are trustworthy despite weakness in Ḥurayth ibn al-Sāʾib, for he was deemed reliable by Ibn Maʿīn and Ibn Ḥibbān, and Aḥmad and Abū Ḥātim and others said: