so you see that Imām Aḥmad (may Allāh have mercy on him) first narrated it from his two teachers: Aswad ibn ʿĀmir and Abū al-Mundhir—whose name is Ismāʿīl ibn ʿUmar al-Wāsiṭī—both of whom said: Thana Kāmil. However, Abū al-Mundhir added to the first and said: "Abū Kāmil," thus giving Kāmil the kunyah Abū Kāmil. This kunyah is not mentioned in his biography; rather, he is given the kunyah (Abū al-ʿAlāʾ) and it is said: (Abū ʿAbd Allāh). If it is preserved, it is a third kunyah for him, but in any case, he is one teacher for both of them. Then Aḥmad said: Thana Abū Aḥmad ... This is a third teacher for Aḥmad—whose name is Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-Zubayrī—and he also narrated it from Kāmil. This is what is meant by Aḥmad's statement: "with his isnād," which cannot be understood by anyone who has not dealt with this matter, although the phrase is not without issue, and I suspect it is from the copyists. In any case; if we assume that the isnād of Abū Aḥmad al-Zubayrī is another isnād; the intermediary between him and Abū Ṣāliḥ is unknown and unnamed, so how can it be considered authentic?! The first isnād is ḥasan as our brother Waṣī Allāh himself said; so how can it be considered authentic as well?! Then I saw that al-Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar indicated in "Aṭrāf al-Musnad" (7/215/9282) the unity of the isnād, saying: "from al-Aswad ibn ʿĀmir, Abū al-Mundhir, and Abū Aḥmad, all three of them from Kāmil Abū al-ʿAlāʾ from Abū Ṣāliḥ from Abū Hurayrah." Furthermore, this story has been reported in other words, both in extended and abbreviated forms, and I have mentioned it in "Ṣifat al-Ṣalāh" (p. 148). *

- (This is al-ʿAbbās ibn ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib, the most generous of Quraysh in giving, and the most connected.) It was recorded by Aḥmad in "al-Musnad" (1/185) and "al-Faḍāʾil" (2/924/1768) and by ʿAbd Allāh