I said: This addition is closer to being correct, and it is likely that Ibn Abī Ghuniyah was inconsistent in his isnād; sometimes mentioning it, and sometimes omitting it. For although he is trustworthy, and Muslim relied on him, and al-Bukhārī included him alongside another, as in "al-Mīzān," Ibn ʿAdī said in "al-Kāmil" (7/210): "Some of what he narrates is not corroborated, and he is among those whose ḥadīth is recorded." Furthermore, the omission cannot be attributed to Imām Aḥmad, for he is an authority in memorization and precision, and because the one who narrated the addition from him—who is Ibn Abān—is also trustworthy. We said that the addition is closer to being correct because it has been corroborated in general; al-Bukhārī narrated it in "al-Tārīkh" (4/1/430/1890), and al-Bazzār (2/278/1700) through two chains from ʿUqbah ibn al-Mughīrah who said: "Ishāq ibn Abī Ishāq al-Shaybānī narrated to me from his father from al-Mukhāriq ibn Sulaym who said: 'I saw ʿAmmār on the day of the Camel...'" the ḥadīth. Al-Bazzār said: "We do not know it from the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) except through this isnād." I said: It is ḥasan, if Allāh wills, and it is necessary to discuss its narrators, even briefly, after the two trustworthy ones agreed upon it. So I say: As for ʿUqbah ibn al-Mughīrah; he is truthful, Ibn Ḥibbān deemed him trustworthy, and a group narrated from him, as I verified in "al-Ḍaʿīfah" under ḥadīth (6035). His teacher, Ishāq ibn Abī Ishāq al-Shaybānī, is similar, as you can see there. As for his father—whose name is Sulaymān ibn Abī Sulaymān al-Shaybānī—he is trustworthy and among the narrators of the two Shaykhs