I said: This is a good isnād, its men are trustworthy, and regarding al-Qāsim—who is Ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Dimashqī, the companion of Abū Umāmah—there is well-known discussion, and he is considered good in ḥadīth. As for ʿUtbah ibn Ḥumayd, Aḥmad said: "Weak, not strong, and people did not circulate his ḥadīth." Abū Ḥātim said: "His ḥadīth is acceptable." Ibn Ḥibbān mentioned him in "al-Thiqāt" (7/272). So someone like him does not have his ḥadīth descend from the rank of ḥasan, especially since Aḥmad's weakening is an unexplained criticism, even if there is a hint of criticism in his ḥadīth, but what is the reason? Ibn Ḥibbān authenticated two ḥadīths for him, one of which was corroborated in "Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī" and others, and the other was previously extracted in the second volume of this series, number (789). Al-Mundhirī indicated in "al-Targhīb" (2/34/3) the strengthening of the ḥadīth by introducing it with his saying: "And from Abū Umāmah..." and by considering the condition of ʿUtbah as good. The ḥadīth has a corroborating narration from Anas (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu), with an addition at the end, narrated by Ibn Mājah and others, but its isnād is very weak, and therefore I included it in "al-Ḍaʿīfah" (3637).

"Take the pre-dawn meal, for it is the blessed meal." It was narrated by al-Nasāʾī (1/304), and in "al-Kubrā" (2/79/2474), Aḥmad (4/132), and al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr" (20/271/641), and "Musnad al-Shāmiyyīn"