I said: the correct view is to weaken it due to the unnamed man, as he is unknown, and he is not mentioned in the isnād of Ibn al-Jawzī, nor in the path of al-Ṭabarānī as it appears from the words of al-Haythamī, and the section that includes Muslimah ibn Makhlad. As for this Jablah: it appears that he is Ibn ʿAṭiyyah al-Filasṭīnī, mentioned in "al-Tahdhīb" with narrations from a group about him, including this al-Rāsibī, and with the authentication of Ibn Maʿīn and Ibn Ḥibbān, and al-Dhahabī also authenticated him in "al-Kāshif." His treatment in "al-Mīzān" indicates that he differentiates between the authenticated al-Filasṭīnī and this Jablah ibn ʿAṭiyyah; for he mentioned him in "al-Mīzān" without attribution, saying: "He is unknown, and the report is extremely objectionable, and it is from the path of two trustworthy narrators from Abū Hilāl Muḥammad ibn Salīm: Jablah narrated to us from a man..." then he mentioned the ḥadīth. Al-Ḥāfiẓ critiqued him in "al-Lisān," saying: "Perhaps the flaw in the ḥadīth is from the unknown man, but as for Jablah; Ibn Abī Ḥātim transmitted his authentication from Ibn Maʿīn..." As for the mursal of Shurayḥ ibn ʿUbayd, Aḥmad said in "al-Faḍāʾil" (1749): Abū al-Mughīrah narrated to us, saying: Ṣafwān narrated to us, saying: Shurayḥ ibn ʿUbayd narrated to me: that the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) prayed for Muʿāwiyah ibn Abī Sufyān: "O Allāh..." the ḥadīth with the wording of the translation. I said: and this is a sound mursal isnād from Syria, its men are trustworthy, and Shurayḥ ibn ʿUbayd is the Ḥaḍramī from Ḥimṣ, a reliable tābiʿī, who narrated from a group of the Companions and sent reports from others