may Allāh guide him! He is quick to weaken authentic ḥadīth out of extreme bias and ignorance of this noble science; for this isnād, which revolves around Simāk ibn Ḥarb from ʿAlqamah, cannot be doubted in its authenticity by anyone knowledgeable except out of ignorance or bias. This is because Simāk ibn Ḥarb is unanimously agreed upon for his truthfulness and reliability, although there has been some discussion about his memory in general. However, the ḥadīth scholars have pointed out that this is not without exception, but rather pertains to those who heard from him later in his life, as Ibn al-Mubārak and others have stated. Indeed, they have weakened his ḥadīth from ʿIkrimah specifically, and thus Yaʿqūb ibn Shaybah clarified the definitive statement about him; he is in three conditions: "1- His narration from ʿIkrimah specifically is disturbed 2- He is reliable in ʿIkrimah but not among the most steadfast 3- Those who heard from him early, like Shuʿbah and Sufyān; their ḥadīth from him are authentic and sound, and what Ibn al-Mubārak said is only seen in those who heard from him later." Al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī confirmed this in "al-Siyar" (5/248), saying afterwards: "I said: This is why al-Bukhārī avoided narrating his ḥadīth, although al-Bukhārī cited him as supporting evidence. So (Simāk ibn Ḥarb from ʿIkrimah from Ibn ʿAbbās): several ḥadīth, they are neither on Muslim's criteria due to his avoidance of ʿIkrimah, nor on al-Bukhārī's criteria due to his avoidance of Simāk, and they should not be considered authentic; because Simāk was criticized because of them." I said: His reasoning for weakening Simāk's narration from ʿIkrimah strongly indicates that he considers his narration from others to be strong, and this is what Imām Muslim followed in his "Ṣaḥīḥ," as well as those who followed his method among the authors of the "Ṣaḥīḥ" collections, like Ibn Ḥibbān and Abū..