and Ibrāhīm ibn al-Zabraqān was deemed trustworthy by Ibn Maʿīn and others, while Abū Ḥātim said: "His status is honesty; his ḥadīth can be written down, but it is not used as proof." I said: There is a disagreement regarding its isnād, as al-Ṭabarānī stated in "al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ" (1/259/2/4460): ʿAbd Allāh ibn Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal narrated to us, saying: Ibrāhīm ibn Dīnār informed us, saying: Ḥammād ibn Khālid al-Khayyāṭ narrated from Bishr ibn Khālid from ʿAṭiyyah ibn al-Ḥārith from Ḥumayd al-Azraq from Masrūq from ʿĀʾishah with it. And he said: "It is not narrated from Masrūq except through this isnād; Ibrāhīm ibn Dīnār is the sole narrator of it." I said: He is trustworthy and among the men of Muslim, and similarly is his teacher, al-Khayyāṭ. As for Bishr ibn Khālid, he is only known through this narration of al-Khayyāṭ. Nevertheless, Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt" (8/199) and it appears as: "Bishr ibn Khālid ibn ʿAṭiyyah ibn al-Ḥārith" following "Tārīkh al-Bukhārī"! Contrary to what is in "al-Jarḥ," it agrees with this narration, so it is more likely. As for Ḥumayd al-Azraq, I did not know him, and al-Haythamī said in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (7/155): "al-Ṭabarānī narrated it in 'al-Awsaṭ' and in it is Ḥumayd ibn al-Azraq, whom I did not know, and the rest of its narrators are trustworthy!" It appears as: "ibn al-Azraq," which is contrary to what is in "al-Awsaṭ" as mentioned earlier, and contrary to his other book "Majmaʿ al-Baḥrayn," so it seems that the attribution tool "ibn" was inserted by the scribe or printer. And Allāh knows best. The ḥadīth has a supporting narration from Shahr ibn Ḥawshab from Asmāʾ bint Yazīd, raised [to the Prophet]. It was recorded by Abū Dāwūd (3982 - 3983) and al-Tirmidhī (3112 - 3113) and others, and the discussion on its extraction is detailed in its place in "Ṣaḥīḥ Abī Dāwūd," by the permission of Allāh