chains from Muḥammad ibn Abī al-Sarī for it. Al-Haythamī said in "al-Majmaʿ" (8/26-27): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī, and in it is ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd ibn Sawwār, who is weak." Al-Mundhirī indicated its weakness in "al-Targhīb" (3/354) and said: "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in brief, and by Abū al-Shaykh in 'al-Thawāb'; and the wording is his." I say: and similarly is this narration of al-Fasawī. Al-Haythamī limited his criticism to (ʿAbd al-Ḥamīd), which is insufficient; for the narrator from him is Bakr ibn Bishr al-ʿAsqalānī—also called al-Tirmidhī; Ibn Abī Ḥātim said (1/1/382) mentioning him with this narration: "I heard my father say: he is unknown." And similarly, it is said in "al-Mīzān." As for Ibn Ḥibbān; he mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt" (8/148) with the narration of Ibn Abī al-Sarī only, excluding others! And Muḥammad ibn Abī al-Sarī has been critiqued regarding his memory, al-Ḥāfiẓ said: "Truthful and knowledgeable, but has many errors." In summary; the isnād is weak and cannot be used as evidence. However, I found another chain through which the ḥadīth becomes authentic, and it is among the rare ones, and all praise is due to Allāh. Al-Dārimī said in "Sunan" (1/129-130); Ḥusayn ibn Manṣūr informed us: Abū Usāmah narrated to us: Abū Ghafār al-Muthanná ibn Saʿīd al-Ṭāʾī narrated to us: ʿAwn ibn