ibn Abī Hilāl from Jahm ibn Abī al-Jahm that Abū al-Zinād informed them that Khārijah ibn Zayd ibn Thābit informed him from Zayd ibn Thābit, saying: and he mentioned it. I said: This is a good isnād for corroborations and supporting evidence; its men are trustworthy, the men of the two Shaykhs, except for Jahm ibn Abī al-Jahm, who is also called Ibn al-Jahm, the client of al-Ḥārith ibn Ḥāṭib al-Qurashī al-Jumaḥī. Ibn Abī Ḥātim mentioned him (1/1/521) with two narrations from him, and Ibn Ḥibbān in "al-Thiqāt" (4/113) with one of them, and Saʿīd ibn Abī Hilāl is added, making him the third. Mūsá ibn ʿUqbah followed him from Abū al-Zinād with it. It was recorded by al-Nasāʾī (no. 4007) and Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī in "al-Tafsīr" (4/139) and also by al-Ṭabarānī (4870) through the route of Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr from him with it. I said: This is a good isnād. In a narration by al-Nasāʾī: from Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr from Abū al-Zinād... with it. He did not mention Mūsá ibn ʿUqbah between them, and al-Nasāʾī said: "Abū al-Zinād inserted between him and Khārijah, Mujālid ibn ʿAwf," then he narrated it through the route of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Isḥāq from Abū al-Zinād from Mujālid ibn ʿAwf, saying: I heard Khārijah ibn Zayd with it similarly. From this aspect, it was recorded by Abū Dāwūd (4272). I said: This is also a good isnād, if it were not for the fact that this Mujālid was not authenticated by anyone other than Ibn Ḥibbān (7/296), who named him "ʿAwf ibn Mujālid" in reverse, but al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Taqrīb":