"Faḍālah ibn Dīnār is unreliable in ḥadīth, and the narration in this chapter is not established." This is what he said, and al-Dhahabī confirmed it in "al-Mīzān," but al-Ḥāfiẓ critiqued it in "al-Lisān," saying: "This is truly astonishing! How can the author say this and be agreed upon; while the ḥadīth is in 'Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim,' even if it is from a different route?! I reviewed al-ʿUqaylī's words and did not find this statement in it." So I say: If he means the text, then it is Muslim. And if he means it generally, even in meaning; it is refuted by what I quoted from al-ʿUqaylī earlier. And something similar comes from him in the following ḥadīth. 5- As for the ḥadīth of Ibn Masʿūd; al-ʿUqaylī mentioned it in the biography of (al-Ḥakam ibn Ẓuḥayr) (1/259) from ʿĀṣim from Zur from him with it. And he said: "al-Ḥakam ibn Ẓuḥayr; al-Bukhārī said: unreliable in ḥadīth." Then al-ʿUqaylī said: "And nothing in this text is authentic from the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) from a reliable route." I said: And this is another text that supports the previous statement of al-ʿUqaylī, which al-Ḥāfiẓ rejected and denied from al-ʿUqaylī. As for the rejection, there is no doubt about it, and as for the denial, it is refuted by these two texts. Perhaps al-ʿUqaylī's basis for this is Aḥmad's statement: "This ḥadīth is one of the rarities of al-Jurayrī," as al-Dhahabī reported in the biography of (al-Jurayrī) in "al-Siyar" (6/155). However, it is known that rarity can coexist with authenticity, so if the narrator is trustworthy, it does not harm