and al-Bayhaqī (4/209-210) said: Buraydah ibn Sufyān ibn Furwah al-Aslamī narrated to me from his father Sufyān from him with it, and it includes the mention of (the two ʿUmars). However, there is consensus on the weakening of this Buraydah, and al-Dāraqutnī even said: "Abandoned." Ibn ʿAdī said: "His ḥadīth is very objectionable." Ibn Ḥibbān deviated by mentioning him in "al-Thiqāt," but this is not considered, and the previously mentioned isnāds and routes suffice, especially the route of Buraydah ibn al-Ḥuṣayb, as it is the most authentic. It testifies that the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) first sent Abū Bakr, but it was not opened for him, then ʿUmar, but it was not opened for him, and then the conquest was at the hands of ʿAlī, a special distinction Allāh granted him over them both (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhum ajmaʿīn). However, the phrase (the cowardice of ʿUmar) remains under scrutiny; the soul is not assured of its authenticity in the ḥadīth due to its absence in the authentic route and others firstly, and the lack of a credible corroboration secondly, unless the narration of Abū Maryam al-Ḥanafī is authentic, and I have mentioned what I have regarding it. And Allāh knows best. If it is said: Does it not gain strength from what al-Ḥākim extracted (3/38) from the route of al-Qāsim ibn Abī Shaybah: narrated to us Yaḥyá ibn Yaʿlá: narrated to us Maʿqil ibn ʿUbayd Allāh from Abū al-Zubayr from Jābir: that the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) handed the banner on the day of Khaybar to ʿUmar (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu), and he went forth and returned, making his companions and himself appear cowardly. Al-Ḥākim said: "Authentic according to the criteria of Muslim"!