it is authentic, because Ibn Abī al-Zinād—who is truthful, though his memory changed when he arrived in Baghdad—has a strong corroborator. Abū Nuʿaym said in "Tasmiyat mā intahá ilaynā min al-ruwāt ʿan Saʿīd ibn Manṣūr ʿāliyyan" (p. 209/1): Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd Allāh al-ʿAbdī also narrated from him. ʿAbd Allāh ibn Jaʿfar narrated to us, Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAbd Allāh narrated to us, Saʿīd ibn Manṣūr informed us, Ibn Abī Dhīb informed us from Sahl with it. I said: This isnād is authentic; its men are trustworthy, the men of Muslim, except for this al-ʿAbdī, who is reliable and truthful as Ibn Abī Ḥātim said (1/1/182). ʿAbd Allāh ibn Jaʿfar is ʿAbd Allāh ibn Muḥammad ibn Jaʿfar ibn Ḥibbān, known as Abū al-Shaykh, and he is a trustworthy ḥāfiẓ with a biography in "Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāẓ" (3/147-149). The ḥadīth has two supporting narrations: the first is from ʿĀʾishah. It was recorded by al-Ṭaḥāwī and Abū Bakr al-Shāfiʿī in "al-Fawāʾid" (7/80/2), and from him by ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Kattānī in "Ḥadīth" (236/1), and also by al-Bayhaqī and Ibn Ḥuyawayh in "Ḥadīth" (3/4/2) from Ibn Isḥāq from ʿUmārah ibn Ghaziyyah from al-Qāsim from ʿĀʾishah with it as marfūʿ. The ḥāfiẓ said, "And its isnād is also good." This is leniency on his part, for Ibn Isḥāq is a mudallis, and he narrated it with ʿanʿanah from the two routes from him. Unless he means it is good due to other supporting evidence, then he is correct. The other supporting narration is from Ibn ʿAbbās. It was recorded by al-Khaṭīb in "al-Mawḍiḥ" (2/67) from Sulaymān ibn Arqam from ʿAṭāʾ ibn Abī Rabāḥ from him, and Sulaymān ibn Arqam is weak. (Note) Al-Suyūṭī attributed the ḥadīth in "al-Jāmiʿ al-Kabīr" (2/286/2) to Abū Dāwūd and al-Bayhaqī in "al-Shuʿab" from Abū Hurayrah with this wording. Then he mentioned it with an addition: "It was said: O