that (Muḥammad ibn Abī ibn Kaʿb) — as it appears in the isnād — is not his son but rather his grandson. This is supported by the narration of Abū Dāwūd al-Ṭayālisī who said: Ḥarb ibn Shadād narrated to us; with the exception that he said: from Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr ibn Abī Kaʿb from his grandfather Ubayy ibn Kaʿb that he had a granary... thus agreeing on the (grandfather) and adding to it, naming Abū Muḥammad as (ʿAmr). It was reported by al-Ḥākim (1/561-562), and through him: al-Bayhaqī (7/109). Ḥarb was contradicted by Abān ibn Yazīd who said: from Yaḥyá ibn Abī Kathīr from al-Ḥaḍramī ibn Lāḥiq from Muḥammad ibn Abī ibn Kaʿb from his father: he had a granary... it was reported by al-Ṭabarānī (1/169/541). Al-Mundhirī said (1/232): "Its isnād is good." These two aspects of the disagreement were mentioned by Imām al-Bukhārī in the biography of (Muḥammad ibn Abī ibn Kaʿb) in "al-Tārīkh" (1/1/27), as well as the narration of al-Walīd ibn Muslim previously mentioned from al-Awzāʿī, in which the name of (the son of Ubayy ibn Kaʿb) is left ambiguous. This is a significant disagreement that leaves the researcher perplexed, unable to assert anything definitively! If I must express my opinion on it, I see that the narration of those who said: (Muḥammad ibn Abī ibn Kaʿb: My grandfather had...) is more likely; because it aligns with the narration of al-Ṭayālisī which made (Ubayy ibn Kaʿb) the grandfather of (Muḥammad ibn Abī ibn Kaʿb); the only difference being that it named the son of Abī ibn Kaʿb as (ʿAmr), which is an addition from a trustworthy — indeed, a memorizer — namely Imām al-Ṭayālisī, the author of "al-Musnad", and the addition of a trustworthy narrator is accepted as is known. This is my opinion, but I did not find among the early scholars anyone who paid attention to it, like the ḥāfiẓ al-Mizzī and al-ʿAsqalānī; for they only included in "al-Tahdhīb" (Muḥammad ibn Abī ibn Kaʿb); because he is the one named by al-Nasāʾī without (Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr ibn Abī) as mentioned earlier, and they said: