"a rare narration from Muḥammad ibn al-Munkadir from Saʿīd, and the preserved narration is from Abū Suhayl from him." I said: Its flaw is either Yaʿqūb ibn Muḥammad al-Zuhrī, for he is often mistaken as mentioned in "al-Taqrīb." Or Muḥammad ibn Yūnus al-Baṣrī, who is more likely, for he is accused—he is al-Kudaymī; al-Dhahabī said in "al-Mughnī": "ruined, Ibn Ḥibbān and others said: he fabricated ḥadīths against trustworthy narrators." And some weak narrators found a follower for Muḥammad ibn Ṭalḥah, narrated by Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn al-Sarī al-Tamīmī: narrated to us Aḥmad ibn Mūsá ibn Isḥāq al-Ḥammār al-Kūfī: narrated to us ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Namrī al-Baṣrī: narrated to us Muṭarrif from ʿAbd Allāh from Mālik ibn Anas from his uncle Abū Suhayl ibn Mālik with it. Ibn ʿAsākir also produced it. He said: "This is a rare ḥadīth from Mālik from his uncle Abū Suhayl, and the preserved narration is from Muḥammad ibn Ṭalḥah ibn al-Ṭawīl from Abū Suhayl." Then he traced it from the paths referred to at the beginning of the extraction from Muḥammad ibn Ṭalḥah. The flaw of this path: Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn al-Sarī al-Tamīmī; for he is a Rāfiḍī liar as mentioned in "al-Mīzān" and "al-Lisān," that is if it is free from ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhāb al-Namrī al-Baṣrī; for he is unknown, and with him al-Dāraqutnī criticized it, as he produced it in "Gharāʾib Mālik" from the path of Aḥmad ibn Mūsá ibn Isḥāq from him, and he said: