Saʿīd ibn al-Muʿallá al-Anṣārī al-Zuraqī, was criticized by al-Nasāʾī, and Abū Ḥātim said: [He is] weak. As for Ibn Ḥibbān, he mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt" (7/482)! And al-Dhahabī said in "al-Kāshif": "There is disagreement regarding his reliability"! I say: he did not accomplish anything. He also mentioned him in "al-Mughnī", and noted the weakening by Abū Ḥātim and the criticism by al-Nasāʾī, but did not address the reliability mentioned by Ibn Ḥibbān, which is correct here, and thus al-Ḥāfiẓ in "al-Taqrīb" decisively stated that he is "weak". And he said in "al-Iṣābah": "Abandoned". See "al-Ḍaʿīfah" (6371). Knowing what has been mentioned, the agreement of these Companions (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhum) on narrating these clear ḥadīths about the abrogation of the recitation of some Quranic verses is one of the greatest proofs of their integrity and their fulfillment of scholarly trust, and their detachment from desires, contrary to the people of desires who do not submit to the legal texts and impose their rational interpretations on them, as previously mentioned by some commentators! And these ḥadīths do not contradict the statement of Ibn ʿAbbās when he was asked: Did the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) leave anything? He said: "He left nothing except what is between the two covers." Narrated by al-Bukhārī (5019). For he only intended the Quran that is recited, as in "al-Fatḥ", and evidence for this is that Ibn ʿAbbās is among those who narrated something of that, as indicated by his statement in the aforementioned ḥadīth (2909): "Allāh and His Messenger spoke the truth: if it were..." Then al-Ḥāfiẓ said (9/65) at the end of his explanation of the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿAbbās: