it is merely his conjecture without any evidence, for I say: Could it not be that he is the son of a Companion? Indeed, this seems more likely. That is the aspect of the disagreement in the isnād regarding Yaḥyá ibn al-Jazzār. As for the disagreement regarding its text, it is extensive, but I will limit myself now to what I must clarify, so I say: In general, they differ in length; the longest is the narration of Abū Muʿāwiyah with Aḥmad and al-Baghawī, and some were abridged by Abū Dāwūd, and similar in length is the narration of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Bishr with Ibn Mājah. In both narrations, it is mentioned that Zaynab, the wife of Ibn Masʿūd (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhā), used to go to a Jewish man to have him perform ruqyah on her! This is very objectionable to me that a noble Companion like Zaynab would go to a Jew to ask him to perform ruqyah on her!! By Allāh, it is one of the great wrongs. All praise is due to Allāh that the isnād to her is not authentic. Similar in its objectionable nature is what came at the end of the narration of Ibn Bishr, where Ibn Masʿūd (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu) said to Zaynab: "If you had done as the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) did, it would have been better for you and more likely to cure you: sprinkle water in your eyes and say: 'Remove the harm, Lord of the people...'" and so on with the known supplication. The mention of sprinkling is unique to ʿAbd Allāh ibn Bishr and not Abū Muʿāwiyah, who is more reliable and has a better memory, especially since there is disagreement about him. The ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Taqrīb": "There is a difference of opinion about him from Ibn Maʿīn and Ibn Ḥibbān, and Abū Zurʿah said: 'There is no harm in him... and al-Bazzār reported that he is weak specifically in al-Zuhrī.'" I say: Such a person’s ḥadīth is only considered ḥasan if it does not contradict; otherwise, it is not