"these are chains of narration that establish the proof for the authentication of this ḥadīth." al-Dhahabī agreed with him. al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "Takhrīj al-Kashshāf" (p. 63): "Its chain of narration is good." I say: He did not authenticate it because Azhar ibn ʿAbd Allāh was not deemed reliable by anyone other than al-ʿAjlī and Ibn Ḥibbān. When al-Ḥāfiẓ mentioned in "al-Tahdhīb" al-Azdī's statement: "They criticize him," he followed it with: "They only criticized his doctrine." For this reason, he said in "al-Taqrīb": "Truthful, criticized for his sectarianism." The ḥadīth was mentioned by al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr in his Tafsīr (1/390) from the narration of Aḥmad, and he did not comment on its chain, but he hinted at its strength by saying: "This ḥadīth has been reported through various paths." For this reason, Shaykh al-Islām Ibn Taymiyyah said in "al-Masāʾil" (83/2): "It is a well-known authentic ḥadīth." al-Shāṭibī also authenticated it in "al-Iʿtiṣām" (3/38). Among the paths of the ḥadīth that Ibn Kathīr referred to, which include additional content, is what al-Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿIrāqī mentioned in "Takhrīj al-Iḥyāʾ" (3/199). He said: "It was narrated by al-Tirmidhī from the ḥadīth of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr and he deemed it good, Abū Dāwūd from the ḥadīth of Muʿāwiyah, and Ibn Mājah from the ḥadīth of Anas and ʿAwf ibn Mālik, and their chains are strong." I say: There are very many paths for the ḥadīth of Anas, seven of which I have gathered, and in all of them..