and the heart is not reassured by this due to the singularity of Abū al-Jamāhir narrating from him. Rather, he is more deserving of being described as unknown, as the ḥadīth principles dictate that a narrator's unknown status is not lifted by a single narration. However, the ḥadīth has supporting evidence that elevates it to the level of ḥasan at the very least. Among them is the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿAbbās, which states: "I am the guarantor of a house in the gardens of Paradise, a house in its highest part, and a house in its lowest part, for the one who abandons argument while being right, abandons lying while joking, and improves his character." It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr" (3/116/1) through the route of Suwayd Abū Ḥātim, who informed us from ʿAbd al-Malik - narration of ʿAṭāʾ - from ʿAṭāʾ from Ibn ʿAbbās as a marfūʿ ḥadīth. I say: This isnād is weak due to Suwayd, who is Ibn Ibrāhīm. Al-Dhahabī mentioned him in "al-Ḍuʿafāʾ" and said: "al-Nasāʾī weakened him." And the ḥāfiẓ said in "al-Taqrīb": "Truthful but poor in memory, he has mistakes, and Ibn Ḥibbān spoke harshly about him." And al-Haythamī said after attributing it to al-Ṭabarānī (8/23): "In it is Abū Ḥātim Suwayd ibn Ibrāhīm, whom the majority weakened, but Ibn Maʿīn declared trustworthy, and the rest of its men are the men of the ṣaḥīḥ." I say: If he had said, "And Ibn Maʿīn declared him trustworthy in one narration," it would have been closer to correctness, for Abū Dāwūd said: "I heard Yaḥyá ibn Maʿīn weaken him." Thus, Ibn Maʿīn in this narration aligns with the majority, making it more acceptable. As for al-Haythamī's statement elsewhere (1/157): "And its isnād is ḥasan, if Allāh wills," it is an evident leniency,