I said: This isnād is weak, as the ḥāfiẓ stated in "Mukhtaṣar Zawāʾid al-Bazzār" (2/380/2051). As for al-Haythamī, he said (10/45): "It was narrated by al-Bazzār, and in it is Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad ibn Janāḥ, whom I do not know, and the rest of its narrators are trustworthy!" Thus he said! And Hilāl ibn al-Jahm, Abū Ḥātim indicated his weakness by saying (4/2/78): "He is not well-known, and his ḥadīth is not fabricated!" He did not mention a narrator for him other than ʿUmar ibn Yūnus; likewise, Ibn Ḥibbān did in "al-Thiqāt" (7/575), and upon this al-Haythamī relied in his general authentication of the rest of the narrators, which is a known habit of his. However, it should be added to ʿUmar ibn Yūnus: this Ibrāhīm ibn Muḥammad ibn Janāḥ, even though he is unknown, as al-Haythamī pointed out, and he was mentioned by the ḥāfiẓ al-Mizzī among the teachers of Muḥammad ibn Miskīn in his book "Tahdhīb al-Kamāl." And know that I had previously included the ḥadīth in "al-Ḍaʿīfah" due to the mention of "Banū ʿĀmir" at its end. Then I found a supporting narration from the ḥadīth of Abū Bakrah, in which "Banū ʿĀmir" is mentioned with the wording: "Aslam, Ghifār, Muzaynah, and Juhaynah are better than Banū Tamīm, Banū ʿĀmir, and the allies: Banū Asad and Banū Ghaṭafān." It was recorded by al-Bukhārī (3515 and 3516), Muslim (7/179-180), al-Tirmidhī (3947), and Ibn Ḥibbān (7246), and al-Tirmidhī said: "A ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth."