that the error is attributed to him "because all those above him are reliable. His teacher, ʿAlī ibn Ḥamshādh al-ʿAdl, is a trustworthy memorizer, as mentioned in "Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ" (15/398). And Muḥammad ibn ʿĪsá ibn al-Sakan is trustworthy, as al-Khaṭīb stated in "al-Tārīkh" (2/401). And Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd Allāh ibn Numayr is also a trustworthy memorizer, among the most knowledgeable of his father's ḥadīth (ʿAbd Allāh). In addition to that, the numerous errors found in his "al-Mustadrak" are well-known among scholars, so attributing the error to him is the most appropriate. As for the other; his error is from two aspects: the first is that he attributed to Abū Ḥātim what is not in his son's book "al-Jarḥ wa-al-Taʿdīl"; unless he took it from another of his books, like "al-ʿIlal"! But this is unlikely; because when al-Ḥāfiẓ narrated from him in "al-Lisān," he followed the mentioned statement from Abū Ḥātim with the comment: "al-Barzālī criticized al-Dhahabī for this attribution to Abū Ḥātim, saying: What is in Ibn Abī Ḥātim's book from his father is: 'ṣāliḥ al-ḥadīth.'" I said: He mentioned this about his father in the biography of Mūsá ibn Sālim Abū Jahḍam, and added—after saying: 'ṣāliḥ al-ḥadīth'—: 'truthful.' Al-Dhahabī mentioned it in "al-Mīzān" following the first biography, and included Abū Ḥātim's statement: 'truthful,' and named a group who considered him reliable. He differentiates between the two biographies, and likewise, he limited "al-Mughnī" to the first without the other, not mentioning it there, but included it in "al-Kāshif," saying: 'truthful,' and al-Ḥāfiẓ followed him in "al-Taqrīb." Aḥmad, Ibn Maʿīn, Abū Zurʿah, and Ibn Ḥibbān considered him reliable. The other aspect of al-Dhahabī's error: even if we accept the validity of the distinction he made; it is not correct to reject al-Ḥākim's authentication of Mūsá ibn Sālim, whom Abū Ḥātim weakened;