people... "the ḥadīth." I said: You see in this narration the man's falsehood in his claim that (Bishr's) narration was reported by al-Bayhaqī within Hishām's narration, while the reality is the exact opposite. The context is for the narration of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Ibrāhīm—who is (Duḥaym)—and within it occurred Hishām's narration. However, this is a minor issue, and the important thing is that it explicitly states that in (Duḥaym's) narration, musical instruments are mentioned. There is no need to remind that (Duḥaym's) narration is from Bishr, and this is the great lie! And Allāh is the one whose help is sought. The second aspect is that all of this is also established in Ibn Ḥajar's narration in "Taghlīq al-Taʿlīq" in the same place he attributed it to, part and page (5/19)! He extracted it through another route from al-Ismāʿīlī, from his teacher al-Ḥasan ibn Sufyān, from his teacher Hishām ibn ʿAmmār and Bishr ibn Bakr as previously mentioned by al-Bayhaqī, except that the ḥāfiẓ said after it: "The wording of al-Ḥasan ibn Sufyān from Hishām ibn ʿAmmār, and the wording of (Duḥaym) is similar." Therefore, there is no difference between the narration of Hishām and Bishr, as both contain the wording (musical instruments), thus the denier's statement is invalidated! And someone who has not followed the man's deceptions might say: Perhaps he did not notice what I have clarified, which is very clear. So I say: That is possible for others like him who are beginners in this knowledge, but not for him! If it is said: Why? I say: Because of the many deceptions we have caught him in, and his ignoring of texts that contradict his desires. What has been mentioned is sufficient for any seeker of truth who is fair, and the matter continues, as you will see in some other corrections