I had mentioned some of this disagreement and preference in my commentary on this ḥadīth in "Ṣaḥīḥ Abī Dāwūd" (no. 124) and quoted Ibn al-Qayyim who said: "The four imams, the jurists collectively, have used the document of ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb from his father from his grandfather as evidence, and it is not known among the imams of fatwá except those who needed it and used it as evidence. It was only criticized by those who did not bear the burdens of fiqh, like Abū Ḥātim al-Bustī and Ibn Ḥazm and others." Accordingly, I deemed the ḥadīth good there, and authenticated it with a supporting narration from Ibn ʿAbbās, preferring the narration of Sufyān for the ḥadīth in question over the narration of Abū ʿAwānah, which includes an addition with the wording: "So whoever adds or omits," where he added to Sufyān: "or omits," and Sufyān—who is al-Thawrī—is more reliable than Abū ʿAwānah. Then, years later, I came across another narration by Sufyān, which included the mentioned addition, and this was one of the reasons for reconsidering the aforementioned preference and examining it. Ibn Abī Shaybah said in "al-Muṣannaf" (1/8-9): Abū Usāmah narrated to us from Sufyān with it. I said: This isnād appears to be authentic, but it has a defect, which is the ʿanʿanah of Abū Usāmah—who is Ḥammād ibn Usāmah—for despite his reliability, the ḥāfiẓ said about him: "He might have committed tadlīs, and in his later years, he would narrate from the books of others." Given this, his narration is not preferred over the narration of (Yaʿlá) for the ḥadīth in question, even though Yaʿlá (who is Ibn ʿUbayd al-Ṭanafīsī) was criticized by some for his narration from Sufyān specifically, he was followed by a reliable person without dispute. Ibn Khuzaymah said in "Ṣaḥīḥ" (1/89/174) and Ibn al-Jārūd in "al-Muntaqá" (35/75): Yaʿqūb ibn Ibrāhīm al-Dawraqī narrated to us: al-Ashjaʿī narrated to us from Sufyān with it. This isnād is extremely authentic, as al-Dawraqī is a trustworthy ḥāfiẓ