I said: such a person is considered good in ḥadīth, but he is not suitable to oppose the elevated narration, because all its narrators are trustworthy without any criticism. It can either be said that Abū Ṣakhr made a mistake in stopping it and the correct version is the elevated one, or it can be said that Abū Hurayrah sometimes narrated it as elevated and sometimes stopped, and each preserved what reached him. The elevation does not oppose the stopping, especially since it is in the ruling of the elevated. However, I found another strange defect for it. Al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī said in his commentary on the "ʿIlal al-Tirmidhī" at the end of the "Sunan" (206/1), "An important principle: the skilled critics among the ḥadīth preservers, due to their extensive practice with ḥadīth and their knowledge of the men and the ḥadīth of each one of them, have a special understanding by which they discern that this ḥadīth resembles the ḥadīth of so-and-so, and does not resemble the ḥadīth of so-and-so. They critique the ḥadīth based on that, and this is something that cannot be expressed in a concise statement. Rather, its people refer to mere understanding and knowledge that they are distinguished with from the rest of the scholars, as previously mentioned in various places. Among that is ...". Then he mentioned many examples, some of which are accepted and some not, and among them is this ḥadīth with its attribution error. He said (207/1-2), "Among that is that Muslim included in his 'Ṣaḥīḥ' (!) from al-Qawārīrī from Abū Bakr al-Ḥanafī from ʿĀṣim ibn Muḥammad al-ʿUmrī: Saʿīd al-Maqburī narrated to us from his father from Abū Hurayrah (then he mentioned the ḥadīth and said:) Al-Ḥāfiẓ Abū al-Faḍl ibn ʿAmmār al-Harawī al-Shahīd said: This is a rejected ḥadīth, and it was only narrated by ʿĀṣim ibn Muḥammad from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Saʿīd al-Maqburī from his father, and ʿAbd Allāh ibn Saʿīd is extremely weak. Yaḥyá al-Qaṭṭān said: I have not seen anyone weaker than him. And it was narrated by Muʿādh ibn Muʿādh from ʿĀṣim ibn Muḥammad from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Saʿīd from his father from Abū Hurayrah, and it resembles the ḥadīth of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Saʿīd. End of quote." I said: Muʿādh ibn Muʿādh, who is al-ʿAnbarī, and Abū Bakr al-Ḥanafī, whose name is ʿAbd al-Kabīr ibn ʿAbd al-Majīd, both are trustworthy and relied upon in the "Ṣaḥīḥayn". Therefore, I do not see the rejection of this ḥadīth by the narration of that one without clear evidence, other than the claim that his ḥadīth resembles the ḥadīth of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Saʿīd