First, Hakim's Narration In Mustadrak , Hakim Neishabari has...

While you resort to them, you shall not fade: God's book and the Prophet's tradition.” [^3] The quoters of these texts are the father and the son who have been reported at the beginning of the document: i.e. Ismael Iabn Abi Owais; Abu Owais. These two are accused of lying and deception.

Now let’s see what scholars have to say concerning the father and son: Hafiz Mazi, in his book Tahdhib Al-Kamal concerning Ismael and his father reports: Yahya Ibn Moin (a great scholar on narration) writes: Abu Owais and his son are weak people Yahya Ibn Mo’in has said: these two are thieves of narrations. Ibn Moin concerning the son, has said “He is not to be trusted”. Nesaee has said the son is weak and unreliable. Abu Al-Qasim Lalkaee has said: Nesaee has said a lot against him.

Ibn Odai (an expert in narrations) says: Ibn Abi Owais reports some strange narrations from his maternal uncle which nobody may believe[^4]. In the introduction Fath Al-Bari Ibn Hajar writes: the narration relayed by Ibn Abi Owais could not be disputed[^5]. In his book Fathul Mulk Al-’Allee Hafiz Seyyed Ahmad Ibn Al-Sadiq reports from Salma Ibn Shobeib that he has heard from Ismael Ibn Abi Owais, saying: the people of Medina disagree and fall into two groups, I shall make up narrations[^6].

Thus, the son (i.e. Ismael Ibn Abi Owais) is accused of making up narrations. Ibn Moin says he is a liar. Besides, his narration is not reported in Sahih of either Muslim or Tirmazi. Concerning the father Abu Hatam Razi in his book Jarh Wa Taadil writes: His narration is reported, but could not be declared. His narration is not strong enough[^7]. And Abu Hatam has reported from Ibn Moin saying that the narrations reported by these two are never reliable.

The point to be emphasized here is that the reporter of the narration, i.e. Hakim Neishaburi has confessed to the weakness of the narration and for this reason has not tried to correct it. However he has offered a document which tries to prove the authenticity of its contents; this too is weak and proves nothing, which adds to the weakness of the narration rather than strengthening it.