and he was followed by Ibn Jurayj from Mujāhid. It was also reported by Ibn Jarīr. It is found in "Tafsīr Mujāhid," published at the expense of Shaykh Khalīfah, the Emir of Qatar (p. 281), from the first path from Mujāhid, but in its chain to him is someone accused, so it—as a book—needs support. However, this ḥadīth is supported by this narration of Ibn Jarīr, so be aware. (Note): ʿAbd al-Razzāq reported in his "Tafsīr" (1/2/277) from the path of al-Kalbī in the interpretation of the previous verse * (Grant me permission...) * similar to the ḥadīth of al-Ḍaḥḥāk from Ibn ʿAbbās, and al-Kalbī is accused of lying. I would not have mentioned it here except to alert to a calamity unknown to Muslims, especially the educated among them, due to their preoccupation with materialism, fame, or wealth, or the like. The verifier, Dr. (Muṣṭafá Muslim Muḥammad), commented on this ḥadīth, saying, and what a terrible thing he said: "It was reported by Aḥmad vol. 6 p. 22, vol. 5 p. 25, and Ibn Mājah in al-Fitan 25"! This referencing is not suitable for this ḥadīth at all, but rather it is for another ḥadīth from the narration of ʿAwf ibn Mālik (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu) regarding the signs of the Hour, in which he said ﷺ: "Then the sons of the yellow will come to you..." So how did such a mix-up occur from someone like this doctor? This is not a typographical error as sometimes happens, but rather—Allāh knows best—the doctor referred to some modern indices, found in it the term "the yellow" attributed to Aḥmad and Ibn Mājah, and thus attributed it to them! And by Allāh, this is a calamity of the age, and what made matters worse is that the second number (5/25) does not even contain this term! This confirms that he copied it from the (index) as he found it, without bothering to refer to