"with a sound isnād." Al-Dhahabī agreed with him. Al-Baghawī said: "A ḥadīth that is ḥasan gharīb." I said: All its narrators are trustworthy, the narrators of the two Shaykhs, if Sayyār is Abū al-Ḥakam as mentioned by al-Baghawī. It has been said that he is Sayyār Abū Ḥamzah, and he is considered trustworthy by Ibn Ḥibbān. A group of trustworthy narrators have reported from him, so it is authentic in any case. There is a difference of opinion regarding the specification of his name in three ways: the first: (Sayyār) without a kunyah as in the mentioned extraction. The second: (Sayyār Abū al-Ḥakam), also reported by al-Ṭabarī (1/11/11) and Abū Yaʿlá (3/1308) from Muḥammad ibn Bishr al-ʿAbdī, and Aḥmad (1/389 and 442) from Wakīʿ, and (1/407) from Abū Aḥmad al-Zubayrī, and al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr" (10/15/9785) and from him Abū Nuʿaym in "al-Ḥilyah" (8/314) from Abū Nuʿaym, all from Bashīr ibn Salmān from Sayyār Abū al-Ḥakam from Ṭāriq with it. The third: (Sayyār Abū Ḥamzah), reported by Abū Dāwūd (1645) through the route of Ibn al-Mubārak from Bashīr ibn Salmān from Sayyār Abū Ḥamzah with it. Sufyān al-Thawrī followed him from Bashīr with it. Reported by Aḥmad (1/442) and through him al-Dūlābī (1/98): ʿAbd al-Razzāq narrated to us, Sufyān informed us with it. Aḥmad said after it: "And it is correct: (Sayyār Abū Ḥamzah), [and he is not Sayyār Abū al-Ḥakam], and Sayyār Abū al-Ḥakam did not narrate anything from Ṭāriq ibn Shihāb." And similarly in his book: "al-ʿIlal" (1/97) and the addition is from him