"Accepted." And the rest of the men in the isnād are trustworthy, from the men of "al-Tahdhīb," except for the shaykh of al-Ṭabarānī (Ibrāhīm) - who is Ibn Hāshim al-Baghawī - and he is trustworthy, so the follow-up is acceptable, and the isnād is good, and Allāh knows best. Thirdly - I had previously mentioned the statement of al-Ḥāfiẓ regarding (al-Mubārak): that he practices tadlīs and taswiyah, and I referred to it earlier. What I want to clarify now is that his statement about him: "and he practices taswiyah" is a mistake - perhaps a slip of the pen - and the correct thing is to limit it to his statement about him: "he practices tadlīs" for two reasons: The first - this is what the ḥuffāẓ who accused him of tadlīs agreed upon, such as Yaḥyá ibn Saʿīd, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, Abū Dāwūd, Abū Zurʿah, and others, and all of them said: "If he says: 'ḥaddathanā,' then he is reliable or trustworthy." And Yaḥyá and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Mahdī said - and the wording is his: "We did not write anything from (al-Mubārak) except what he says in it: 'I heard al-Ḥasan.'" I have mentioned some of their statements there, and this tadlīs is what al-Ḥāfiẓ calls in "Ṭabaqāt al-Mudallisīn" as tadlīs al-isnād, which is what is meant by them when mentioned generally, and it is when he drops his shaykh from it. As for tadlīs al-taswiyah, it is when he does that for his shaykh - as in "al-Ṭabaqāt" - dropping the shaykh of his shaykh, and this type of tadlīs became well-known by al-Walīd ibn Muslim, the student of Imām al-Awzāʿī, as he would drop from his isnād the shaykh of al-Awzāʿī, and some contemporaries might overlook this type of tadlīs, thus accepting his ḥadīth if he explicitly states he heard from his shaykh! I provided an example of this in the previous correction under number (10), so refer to it, and I pointed out the tadlīs of al-Walīd