and Ibn al-Qaṭṭān said after it: "This does not authenticate the ḥadīth of Abū Saʿīd that we have finished critiquing, but rather it means that the two statements from Yaḥyá ibn Abī Kathīr are authentic, and he is correct in that; it is authentic from Yaḥyá ibn Abī Kathīr that he said: from Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān from Jābir, and that he said: from ʿIyāḍ or [Hilāl ibn ʿIyāḍ, from Abū Saʿīd al-Khudrī. Ibn al-Sakan cannot authenticate the ḥadīth of Abū Saʿīd] (1) at all, and if he did, it would be [an error in judgment, and it is only authentic from the ḥadīth of Jābir] (1), and Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Thawbān is trustworthy, and it is authentic that he heard from Jābir, and we have clarified this previously, and Miskīn ibn Bukayr Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Ḥadhdhāʾ is reliable; Ibn Maʿīn said this, and this expression from him is reassuring, as he clarified it himself, and he stated that when he says about a man: there is no harm in him, he considers him trustworthy, (2) and Abū Ḥātim said the same about him. al-Ḥasan ibn Aḥmad ibn Abī Shuʿayb Abū Muslim: truthful, there is no harm in him. And the rest of those in the isnād are not questioned about, and from Yaḥyá ibn Abī Kathīr." I said: and the conclusion of Ibn al-Qaṭṭān's investigation is that the ḥadīth from this route is good, as he stated before presenting its isnād, and after speaking at length about the route of ʿIkrimah ibn ʿAmmār from Yaḥyá ibn Abī Kathīr from Hilāl ibn ʿIyāḍ— in one narration: ʿIyāḍ ibn Abī Zuhayr— from Abū Saʿīd, and he criticized it for the inconsistency in its isnād and text, and the unknown status of this ʿIyāḍ, and for this reason, I included it in "Ḍaʿīf Abī Dāwūd" under number (3), and I elaborated on it