and they indicated that Muslim narrated from him, but they generalized! In fact, he narrated from him in conjunction with Thābit al-Bunānī, as mentioned in "Combining the Men of the Two Ṣaḥīḥs" (1/358-359). I said: someone like him is suitable for supporting evidence, and perhaps this is what al-Dhahabī intended, and Allāh knows best. Moreover, he has been followed up, even if the follow-up is weak, but if it does not benefit, it does not harm, so let us mention it then: Ibn Kathīr said in his "Tafsīr"—following Aḥmad's narration: "A strange ḥadīth, and ʿAlī ibn Zayd ibn Judʿān has oddities, but Ibn Abī Ḥātim narrated it from another perspective, saying..." I said: he provided its isnād to Muḥammad ibn ʿUqbah al-Rifāʿī from Ziyād al-Jaṣṣāṣ from Abū ʿUthmān al-Nahdī with a similar narration. And Ibn Kathīr remained silent about it due to its evident weakness; for this Ziyād—who is Ibn Abī Ziyād al-Jaṣṣāṣ—is weak by consensus, and no one authenticated him except Ibn Ḥibbān, who mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt" (6/320)! Nonetheless, he said: "He might make mistakes." And Muḥammad ibn ʿUqbah is not well-known; Ibn Abī Ḥātim said (4/1/36): "I asked my father about him, and he said: A shaykh." Then Ibn Kathīr said: "In the meaning of this ḥadīth is what al-Tirmidhī and others narrated through the route of ʿAmr ibn Dīnār from Sālim from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb that the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said: 'Whoever enters the market...' the ḥadīth."