What is the optimal way to reconcile Bukhari's statements with the actions of Ibn Adiyy and Al-Dhahabi concerning the Hadith of Abu Qatada, which Muslim reported? Is their discourse acceptable, or is it a difference of opinion and ijtihad, with the possibility of pointing to whoever elaborated on the chains of transmission for this hadith?

Abdullah ibn Ma'bad al-Zamani is considered reliable by scholars, and Al-Bukhari's statement about him does not undermine his trustworthiness; rather, he said, "No hearing from Abu Qatadah is known for him." The hadith is authentic according to Muslim's conditions, even if it does not meet Al-Bukhari's conditions, because Al-Bukhari's condition for hearing is stricter. The majority of hadith scholars consider Muslim's conditions sufficient (the possibility of hearing). The hadith also has other chains of transmission and supporting evidences.