the same. I said: This isnād is authentic like the previous one. ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm also followed it from Qatādah with the same. It was narrated by al-Ḥākim (2/190) from Shādh ibn Fayāḍ who said: ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm narrated to us the same. He said: "The isnād is authentic." and al-Dhahabī agreed! Shādh was contradicted by Khalīl ibn ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm, who said: My father narrated to me from Qatādah from al-Ḥasan from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAmr with it as a marfūʿ ḥadīth. He mentioned al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī instead of Ibn al-Musayyib. It was narrated by al-Nasāʾī and al-ʿUqaylī in "al-Ḍuʿafāʾ" (p. 121) and he said: "Khalīl contradicts in some of his ḥadīth." I said: He is not inferior to Shādh ibn Fayāḍ in reliability and memorization, and there is slight criticism regarding their precision, and perhaps the discrepancy is from ʿUmar ibn Ibrāhīm himself, for in "al-Taqrīb": "Truthful, but there is weakness in his ḥadīth from Qatādah." The narration of Shādh from him is preferable to me because it agrees with the narration of Ibn Abī ʿArūbah from Qatādah, and due to another follow-up I found in "al-Kāmil" by Ibn ʿAdī, which he narrated (p. 289/2) through the route of Muḥammad ibn Bilāl who said: ʿImrān narrated to us from Qatādah from Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib with the same. He said: "And Muḥammad ibn Bilāl narrates uniquely from ʿImrān al-Qaṭṭān, and he has unique narrations from others, and I hope there is no harm in him."