the biography of Sayyār Abū al-Ḥakam, and al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Mizzī mentioned that Ibn Ḥibbān included him in "al-Thiqāt." Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar said: "I did not find any mention of Abū Ḥamzah in 'Thiqāt Ibn Ḥibbān,' so it should be investigated." I say: he is listed there in "Followers of the Followers" just before the biography of Sayyār Abū al-Ḥakam (6/421 - Hindiyyah). Likewise, he was mentioned by al-Bukhārī in "al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr" (2/2/160) and by Ibn Abī Ḥātim (2/1/255). The first is a trustworthy narrator from the men of the two Shaykhs, while the latter was only deemed trustworthy by Ibn Ḥibbān. Many narrated from him, but we did not find any evidence for those who claimed he is the narrator of this ḥadīth, except for the explicit statement by his narrator—Bashīr ibn Sulaymān—that it is Sayyār Abū al-Ḥakam, except for the mere claim that he erred in this and that the correct attribution is to Sayyār Abū Ḥamzah. Even if we concede this, the isnād does not fall below the level of ḥasan due to the previous authentication by Ibn Ḥibbān and the fact that many narrated from him. The ḥadīth was mentioned by al-Haythamī in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (7/329) with the full narration by Aḥmad, and partially by al-Bazzār, then he said: "Their narrators are the narrators of the Ṣaḥīḥ." (Benefit): In "al-Majmaʿ," (al-ʿilm) appears instead of (al-qalam), and it seems to be a distortion. The correct version is what is in "al-Musnad": (al-qalam), as it matches what is in "Jāmiʿ al-Masānīd" (27/166-167) from him, and the narration of "al-Adab al-Mufrad" from the Salafiyyah edition, the Tāzī edition, and the Hindiyyah edition, contrary to the Jīlāniyyah edition. This does not contradict the addition by al-Nasāʾī and the narration by al-Dānī, as they mean (al-qalam) or something close to it, especially since ʿAlī ibn Maʿbad explained it by saying: "meaning the book," that is, writing