I said: its isnād is good, all its narrators are trustworthy, and if it were not for the discussion regarding (ʿĀrim), whose name is Muḥammad ibn al-Faḍl al-Sudūsī - the teacher of al-Ṭabarānī's teacher ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Baghawī - about his memory, I would have affirmed its authenticity. Al-Ḥāfiẓ said about him: "Trustworthy and reliable, but his memory changed in the latter part of his life." As for his statement about (Ṭaysalah): "Acceptable," it is not acceptable from him; rather, he is trustworthy as Ibn Maʿīn said, as narrated by Ibn Abī Ḥātim from him (2/1/501). This is also mentioned by Ibn Shāhīn in "Thiqātuhu" from Yaḥyá, meaning Ibn Maʿīn, and it was reported by al-Mizzī in "Tahdhībuhu" (13/467) from him. Despite all this, al-Ḥāfiẓ did not mention him in "Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb," as if he was preoccupied with refuting al-Mizzī's differentiation between Ṭaysalah ibn ʿAlī al-Hudhali, from whom a group of trustworthy narrators transmitted, none of whom include Ziyād ibn Mukhāriq, and Ṭaysalah ibn Miyyās al-Sulamī, also said to be al-Hudhali. Ziyād mentioned above narrated from him, as did Yaḥyá ibn Abī Kathīr, who is among the narrators from the first. Al-Ḥāfiẓ used this and other evidence to conclude that the correct view is that they are one and the same, and he cited this from more than one of the ḥuffāẓ, supporting it with a narration extracted by al-Bukhārī in "al-Adab al-Mufrad" (no. 8) through the route of Ziyād ibn Mukhāriq mentioned earlier, who said: Ṭaysalah ibn Miyyās narrated to me from Ibn ʿUmar. He was corroborated by Ayyūb ibn ʿUtbah, who said: Ṭaysalah ibn ʿAlī narrated to me, saying: I came to Ibn ʿUmar... and mentioned it. However, he explicitly raised the nine major sins to the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam). It was extracted by al-Baghawī in "Musnad Ibn al-Jaʿd" (2/1150/3426), al-Kharāʾiṭī in "Masāwīʾ al-Akhlāq" (118/247), al-Khaṭīb in "al-Kifāyah" (p. 105), and al-Bayhaqī in "al-Sunan" (3/409) through his routes from him