and this is undoubtedly more authentic as a mursal [ḥadīth], and al-Muhājir's condition is unknown. However, it has been narrated as musnad from Abū Hurayrah through another chain better than this one, for Abū al-Asbāṭ al-Ḥārithī—whose name is Bishr ibn Rāfiʿ—is weak. Al-Ṭabarānī also reported it through his chain, as will be mentioned shortly, by the will of Allāh. The other: al-Bazzār said in his "Musnad" (2/160/1421 - Kashf al-Astār): Zakariyyā ibn Yaḥyá narrated to us, Shabābah narrated to us, al-Mughīrah ibn Muslim narrated to us from Hishām from Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn from him with the same ḥadīth as the translation, except for the phrase about tapping. This isnād is good, all its men are trustworthy from the men of "al-Tahdhīb" except for Zakariyyā ibn Yaḥyá, who is Ibn Ayyūb, Abū ʿAlī al-Ḍarīr, and he has a biography in "Tārīkh Baghdād" (8/457) narrated by a group of trustworthy ḥadīth preservers other than al-Bazzār, so the critical ḥadīth scholars accept his narrations, especially in supporting and corroborating narrations, and perhaps for this reason, al-Haythamī said in "al-Majmaʿ" (4/278): "al-Bazzār narrated it, and its men are trustworthy." The ḥāfiẓ confirmed it in "Mukhtaṣar Zawāʾid Musnad al-Bazzār" (1/575/1019). 3 - As for the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿAbbās, it also has two chains: the first is narrated by Abū al-Asbāṭ from Yaḥyá ibn Abī Kathīr from ʿIkrimah from him. Al-Ṭabarānī reported it in "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr" (11/355/11999) through the chain of Yaḥyá al-Ḥammānī: Ḥātim ibn Ismāʿīl narrated to us from him. Al-Haythamī said (4/278): "Al-Ṭabarānī narrated it, and in it is Yaḥyá ibn ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd al-Ḥammānī, who has been deemed trustworthy, but he is weak." I say: Hishām ibn Bahrām followed him, and he is trustworthy according to al-Bayhaqī in the previous ḥadīth of Abū Hurayrah / the first chain, and the only flaw in this isnād is the weakness of this Abū al-Asbāṭ as mentioned there