and Siyar: he is Abū Ḥamzah al-Kūfī, whom Ibn Ḥibbān deemed trustworthy, and al-Ḥākim authenticated his narration (1/408), with al-Dhahabī agreeing; thus, his ḥadīth is considered good. And Muḥammad ibn ʿAbbād al-Makkī is also trustworthy, from the men of the two Shaykhs. As for Muḥammad ibn Dāwūd ibn Jābir al-Aḥmasī, al-Khaṭīb mentioned him in "al-Tārīkh" (5/263-264), and narrated a ḥadīth for him from the path of al-Ṭabarānī, different from this one, and added nothing further; thus, he is unknown. However, he has been followed up, as al-Shajjarī narrated in "al-Amālī" (2/273) from the path of Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Jabbār, who said: Muḥammad ibn ʿAbbād al-Makkī narrated it to us. And Aḥmad ibn ʿAbd al-Jabbār, al-Dhahabī said in "al-Mughnī": "His ḥadīth is sound, though several have weakened him." Another has also followed him, as al-Ṭabarānī said in "al-Awsaṭ" (9/73/8154): Mūsá ibn Hārūn narrated to us, who said: Muḥammad ibn ʿAbbād al-Makkī narrated it to us; except that he did not mention "adultery." And Mūsá ibn Hārūn: he is al-Ḥammāl, a trustworthy memorizer. With this narration, it becomes clear that the men of the isnād of the ḥadīth are the men of "al-Ṣaḥīḥ," except for Siyar Abū Ḥamzah al-Kūfī, who was previously mentioned as having good ḥadīth. Al-Mundhirī indicated in "al-Targhīb" (3/52/23) the strengthening of the ḥadīth. As for al-Haythamī's statement in "al-Majmaʿ" (4/118): "al-Ṭabarānī narrated it in 'al-Awsaṭ,' and its men are the men of (al-Ṣaḥīḥ)"! This generalization—as it seems to me—means that this (Siyar) is Abū al-Ḥakam al-ʿAnazī al-Wāsiṭī; for he is from the men of the two Shaykhs, but Imām Aḥmad and others have asserted that (Siyar)