as for the three commentators on "al-Targhīb" in their new and beautiful edition, they seized upon the aforementioned reference to pretend that they are knowledgeable in this science. However, they revealed their ignorance when they said: "In it is Jaʿfar ibn Sulaymān al-Ḍabʿī: he is alone in narrating ḥadīths that are considered objectionable: 'Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl' (1/408)." This is how they quoted from "al-Mīzān"! It is an incomplete quote, perhaps unintentionally so, mistakenly thinking they were quoting something that supports their weakening of the ḥadīth. This is one of the many evidences of their ignorance in this science and their intrusion upon it; for what matters is whether the narrator is trustworthy or truthful, and it does not harm him thereafter if he has ḥadīths that were objected to. For criticism is not established by this, but rather if his objectionable narrations are numerous, and then it is said about him: his ḥadīth is objectionable. Jaʿfar, in this case, is not like that, and it is astonishing that al-Dhahabī's words indicate and confirm this! For he said—after mentioning the words of the imams about him, as if summarizing them—: "He is truthful in himself, and he is alone in narrating ḥadīths that have become objectionable, and there is a difference of opinion regarding using them as evidence, among them..." Then he listed six ḥadīths and commented on them by saying: "And most of that is in 'Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim'..." I said: and some of them are with him from his narration from Jaʿfar from Thābit from Anas, which is the ḥadīth: "He is in a state of newness with his Lord"; it is extracted in "al-Irwāʾ" (3/143/678) (1), and "Mukhtaṣar..