Asim, from Ibn Sirin, who said:

“Do not single out ...”

Thus, he related the hadith as a report attributed to Ibn Sirin, as you can see. Its chain of transmission is authentic, but it does not render defective the hadith attributed to the Prophet, whether with a continuous chain or mursal, for the reason already mentioned: an addition from a trustworthy narrator is accepted.

I wished to mention this lest another person ignorant of this discipline should come across it and declare the hadith defective on the basis of this report attributed to Ibn Sirin, just as Hassan declared it defective on account of its being mursal.

The fact is that there is nothing unusual about a hadith being transmitted in different forms: at times with a continuous chain, at times mursal, and at times as a report attributed to a Companion or Successor, while the narrator is one and the same, as is Ibn Sirin here. A narrator may at times be diligent and provide its chain of transmission; at another time, he may transmit it mursal by way of abbreviation; or he may not be sufficiently attentive and so relate it as a report attributed to Ibn Sirin. The reason may also be that he knows the hadith to be well known as attributed to the Prophet and therefore sees no need to state that attribution explicitly. In such a case, the determining factor is to follow the preponderant evidence that warrants a decisive conclusion: whether it is attributed to the Prophet with a continuous chain, attributed to the Prophet mursal, or attributed to Ibn Sirin. If the first of these is preponderant, the lesser forms do not contradict it, for the reason I have mentioned. And Allah knows best.

What further confirms the authenticity of the hadith and its prevalence among the early generations is what Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated from Ibrahim—namely, Ibrahim ibn Yazid al-Nakha'i—who said:

“They used to dislike singling out Friday, and likewise its night, for prayer.”

Its narrators are trustworthy.

Now, in view of the affliction we face from the many young men and others who write in this discipline while being strangers to it and utterly devoid of knowledge—as every fair-minded person who has examined the many examples of errors, indeed of ignorance, cited earlier in these corrections, and also in the introduction to this volume and others, can decisively affirm (1)—I consider it incumbent upon me to offer a reminder—“And remind, for indeed the reminder benefits the believers”—and so I say:

I advise those writers and critics not to rush into writing—if they are