Muḥammad ibn Sābiq disagreed in this matter. I said: Then he traced his chain of narration to al-ʿAṭṭār from Isrāʾīl from Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān from al-Ḥakam from Ibrāhīm from ʿAlqamah from ʿAbd Allāh with it being raised. I said: I did not find anyone mentioning Isḥāq ibn Ziyād al-ʿAṭṭār except al-Khaṭīb in this context, and his disagreement with Muḥammad ibn Sābiq in his chain of narration makes it unlikely that he would be preferred over him. Yes, it is possible to say: if his narration is preserved, then Isrāʾīl has two chains of narration for this ḥadīth from Ibrāhīm, one preserved by Muḥammad ibn Sābiq and the other by Isḥāq ibn Ziyād. And I found a corroborator for his narration from Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, narrated by Ismāʿīl ibn Abān, who said: Ṣabāḥ ibn Yaḥyā narrated to us from Ibn Abī Laylā from al-Ḥakam from Ibrāhīm with it. Al-Ḥākim recorded it (1/13) as supporting evidence, and said: "Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Abī Laylā, even though he is attributed with poor memory, is one of the jurists and judges of Islam." And there is another path for the ḥadīth from Ibn Masʿūd indicating that it is a preserved ḥadīth and not objectionable, narrated by Abū Bakr ibn ʿAyyāsh from al-Ḥasan ibn ʿAmr al-Fuqaymī from Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Yazīd from his father from ʿAbd Allāh with it being raised. It was recorded by al-Bukhārī in "al-Adab" (312), Ibn Ḥibbān in "Ṣaḥīḥ" (48), al-Ḥākim (1/12), and Aḥmad (2/416). Al-Ḥākim said: "According to their criteria." I said: Rather, it is only authentic, not according to their criteria, for Muḥammad ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Yazīd was not included by them, and Abū Bakr ibn ʿAyyāsh was not included by Muslim.