" as for Saʿīd ibn Salamah, he was followed by Ṣafwān ibn Sulaym in his narration of it with al-Jallāḥ Abū Kathīr, which was narrated from him by al-Layth ibn Saʿīd, ʿAmr ibn al-Ḥārith, and others. Through the route of al-Layth, it was narrated by Aḥmad, al-Ḥākim, and al-Bayhaqī." I said: meaning that this al-Jallāḥ also narrated it from Saʿīd ibn Salamah, so he has two narrators, Ṣafwān and al-Jallāḥ. In that case, attributing this follow-up to Aḥmad is questionable, because the chain of narration with him (2/378) is as follows: "Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd narrated to us from al-Layth from al-Jallāḥ Abū Kathīr from al-Mughīrah ibn Abī Burdah from Abū Hurayrah..." So, in this context, al-Jallāḥ is following Saʿīd ibn Salamah, not Ṣafwān as claimed by al-Ḥāfiẓ, may Allāh have mercy on him. Yes, his claim is valid when considering al-Ḥākim's context for his chain of narration (1/141), from which al-Bayhaqī received it (1/3). It was narrated through the route of ʿUbayd ibn ʿAbd al-Wāḥid ibn Sharīk: Yaḥyá ibn Bukayr narrated to us: al-Layth narrated to me from Yazīd ibn Abī Ḥabīb: al-Jallāḥ Abū Kathīr narrated to me that Ibn Salamah al-Makhzūmī narrated to him that al-Mughīrah ibn Abī Burdah informed him of it. This context differs from Aḥmad's context in two places: first, that he inserted between al-Layth and al-Jallāḥ Yazīd ibn Abī Ḥabīb, while the first omitted him. The second: he inserted between al-Jallāḥ and al-Mughīrah Ibn Salamah al-Makhzūmī, who is Saʿīd ibn Salamah, while the first omitted him. This difference, as it appears at first glance, is only between Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd and Yaḥyá ibn Bukayr. If this contradiction from Yaḥyá were confirmed, it would be considered weaker because he is inferior to Qutaybah in memorization