likewise, it was also narrated by al-Tirmidhī (3308): Aḥmad ibn Manīʿ narrated to us: Hushaym narrated to us: Ḥuṣayn narrated to us with it, and he said, "A good and authentic ḥadīth." Similarly, it was also narrated by Ibn Ḥibbān (6837) through another route from Hushaym. A group of reliable narrators followed Hushaym from Ḥuṣayn with it, except for the ḥadīth of the chapter. It was also narrated by al-Bukhārī (936 and 4899), Muslim as well, Ibn Khuzaymah (3/161-162), Abū Yaʿlá (1888) as well, Aḥmad (3/313 and 370), Ibn Abī Shaybah (2/113), Ibn Jarīr in "al-Tafsīr" (28/67-68), and al-Bayhaqī (3/181-182) through several routes from Ḥuṣayn with it, some of whom do not mention Abū Sufyān, and all of them did not mention the ḥadīth of the chapter, making it anomalous due to the uniqueness of Zakariyyā ibn Yaḥyá with it; he is al-Wāsiṭī, nicknamed (Zahmowayh); he is trustworthy, as al-Ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Lisān" (2/484), and Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt" (8/253), saying, "He was among the proficient ones"! Perhaps his contradiction to these reliable narrators with this addition does not support Ibn Ḥibbān's statement about him, so it should be considered! Therefore, the commentator on "Musnad Abī Yaʿlá" overlooked this contradiction when he said in his commentary on the ḥadīth, "Its isnād is authentic, and it was previously mentioned under number (1888)." Similarly, the commentator on "al-Iḥsān" (15/300) said, "Its isnād is authentic, Zakariyyā ibn Yaḥyá Zahmowayh, a group narrated from him, and the author mentioned him in