" the statement of al-Bukhārī: "Siyār Abū al-Ḥakam heard from Ṭāriq ibn Shihāb" is an error, from him and those who followed him. The one who narrates from Ṭāriq is Siyār Abū Ḥamzah. Aḥmad, Yaḥyá, and others said this." However, al-Bukhārī was followed in stating that he narrates from Ṭāriq by Muslim in "al-Kuná," al-Nasāʾī, al-Dūlābī, and several others, as mentioned in "al-Tahdhīb" as well, and he commented on it by saying: "It is an error as al-Dāraquṭnī said." I said: This is a severe disagreement among these eminent scholars. Perhaps the cause is the differing narrations on the latter two of the three aforementioned aspects, as the first does not contradict them. It can be aligned with one of them from the perspective of applying the unrestricted to the restricted. The two statements revolve around them, and it is difficult for people like us to prefer one over the other, due to the lack of clear evidence supporting that. Despite this, the inclination is to favor the statement of Imām al-Bukhārī and those with him, because the narrators supporting his view are more numerous than those of the other view, as is evident from their narrations. I say this if the difference is from the narrators from Bashīr ibn Sulaymān. But if the difference is from him himself, as Abū Dāwūd indicates with his previous statement: ".. but Bashīr used to say: Siyār Abū al-Ḥakam, which is a mistake." I said: So if the mistake is from Bashīr himself, the matter becomes more complicated, because one could say: What is the evidence that it is from him, and there is no other narrator besides him who narrated from Siyār, saying: (Siyār Abū Ḥamzah)? In conclusion, the matter still requires further research and investigation to determine the identity of the narrator. Is it Abū Ḥamzah or Abū al-Ḥakam?