and ʿAbd al-Karīm ibn Muḥammad al-Lakhmī; he was mentioned by al-Bukhārī in "al-Tārīkh" and Ibn Ḥibbān in his book "al-Thiqāt" (7/131), and also by Ibn ʿAsākir through the narration of Sulaymān ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān only, thus he is unknown. In summary, the ḥadīth is authentic because most of the chains do not establish an intermediary between ʿUrwah ibn Ruwaym and Anas, especially since the first isnād is authentic. Al-Haythamī said in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (10/55): "It was narrated by Aḥmad, and its men are the men of the authentic [collections], except for ʿUrwah ibn Ruwaym, who is trustworthy." Then I came across another difference in this chain, as al-Ṭabarānī said in "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr" (22/342/857) and "Musnad al-Shāmiyyīn" (1/299/522): Aḥmad ibn Khulayd al-Ḥalabī narrated to us: Abū Tawbah al-Rabīʿ ibn Nāfiʿ narrated to us: Muḥammad ibn Muhājir narrated from ʿUrwah ibn Ruwaym from Abū Kabshah al-Anmārī who said: We went out with the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) in one of his expeditions, and he stopped at a place, so we came to him there, he raised his hands and said ... and he mentioned it. I said: This is also authentic, its narrators are trustworthy from the men of "al-Tahdhīb"; except for Aḥmad ibn Khulayd, who is al-Kindī, a group of ḥadīth scholars narrated from him, and al-Dhahabī said in his biography in "al-Siyar" (13/489): "I know of no fault in him." And his statement: "from Abū Kabshah al-Anmārī"; if it is preserved, it does not harm its isnād; because it is a transition from one Companion to another, and Allāh knows best. ʿAbd al-Razzāq narrated from Maʿmar from Qatādah who said: The Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said: