al-Anṣārī mentioned by Ibn Ḥibbān in "al-Thiqāt" (4/261). as for his assertion that he is trustworthy; there is no basis for it, as he is not well-known, and no one other than Ibn Ḥibbān has declared him trustworthy. And Allāh knows best. From the above, you learn that the statement of the commentator on "al-Aḥādīth al-Mukhtārah": "Its isnād is ḥasan!" is not ḥasan due to the anonymity we have clarified. And Allāh is the One who grants success.

- (O Allāh! Strengthen Islam through ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb specifically). It was narrated by Ibn Ḥibbān in "Ṣaḥīḥ" (2180- Mawārid) through the route of ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿĪsá al-Farwī, as well as by al-Bayhaqī in "al-Sunan" (6/370), and Ibn ʿAdī in "al-Kāmil" (6/310), and from him by Ibn ʿAsākir in "Tārīkh Dimashq" (12/718) - and they gave him the kunya Abū ʿAlqamah - who said: ʿAbd al-Malik ibn al-Mājishūn narrated to us: Muslim ibn Khālid narrated to me from Hishām ibn ʿUrwah from his father from ʿĀʾishah: that the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said: ... and he mentioned it. I say: And this isnād is weak due to the weakness of this al-Farwī, and it is surprising that Ibn Ḥibbān authenticated him, even though he mentioned him in "al-Ḍuʿafāʾ" by his name and kunya (2/45), and said: "He narrates wonders and attributes to trustworthy narrators reports that those skilled in ḥadīth know to be inverted." Others have also declared him weak. al-Ḥusaynī named him in "al-Ikmāl" (7/84): "ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad al-Farwī"! Those above him are trustworthy, except that Muslim ibn Khālid is poor in memory, and he is the Zanjī from Mecca