and the addition he made; perhaps he stole it from what was narrated by Aṣbagh ibn Zayd with his isnād to Ibn ʿUmar, raised [to the Prophet] with the wording: "Whoever hoards food for forty nights; he has disassociated himself from Allāh, and Allāh has disassociated Himself from him..." It is a rejected ḥadīth; as Abū Ḥātim said in "al-ʿIlal" (1/392/1174), and many of the ḥadīth scholars have criticized it due to this (Aṣbagh), and the flaw is from his unknown teacher. Some erred by strengthening the ḥadīth; all of which is a delusion I clarified in "Ghayat al-Maram" (194-195/324), where I extracted it and conveyed the scholars' statements on its isnād, clarifying the stronger from the weaker opinion in a way not found elsewhere. And Allāh is the one who grants success. Furthermore, among what supports the ḥadīth of the chapter: is the ḥadīth of Maʿmar ibn Abī Maʿmar, raised [to the Prophet]: "Whoever hoards; he is a sinner." It was narrated by Muslim and others, and it is extracted in "Ghayat al-Maram" (165/325). It appeared in "al-Targhīb" (3/26) attributed to Muslim and others with the addition: "... food!" which has no basis in any of the narrations of Maʿmar's ḥadīth, as I pointed out in "al-Taʿlīq al-Raghīb" (3/26). On this occasion, I say: Among what is worth noting is that the attribution (al-Ghusaylī) in the name (Ibrāhīm ibn Isḥāq) was altered in "al-Mustadrak" to (al-ʿUsaylī) with a plain ʿayn, instead of a dotted one as it is with al-Bayhaqī, and in his biography in "al-Mīzān": that he is from the descendants of (Ḥanẓalah al-Ghasīl). Al-Mundhirī mentioned it correctly in "al-Targhīb" but the three commentators on it altered it (3/570) making it..