Ibn Abī Shaybah recorded it. Its chain of transmission is authentic according to the criteria of al-Bukhārī and Muslim. ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Ḥārith was al-Anṣārī, Abū al-Walīd al-Baṣrī, a relative by marriage and son-in-law of Ibn Sīrīn.

I say: These are numerous and strong reports that corroborate the hadith under discussion. Although they are attributed to Companions, they carry the ruling of reports attributed to the Prophet, for it is ordinarily improbable that a group of them would concur upon such a matter without having received Prophetic instruction. Even if a similar report had not been attributed to the Prophet, it would still constitute proof; how then, when it has been narrated as attributed to the Prophet through two routes: one being the hadith under discussion, and the other its aforementioned corroborating report from Abū ʿĀʾishah?

As for al-Bayhaqī’s objection that it conflicts with those who narrated it from Ibn Masʿūd as a report attributed to a Companion, that objection could have been given weight were it not for the first route. This was among the routes that escaped al-Bayhaqī, and he made no mention of it. For this reason, after the preceding report of Kardūs and others, he said: “This is an opinion expressed by ʿAbd Allāh, may Allah be pleased with him; whereas the hadith with a continuous chain to the Prophet, together with the established practice of the Muslims, is more deserving of being followed.”

Ibn al-Turkumānī responded: “I say: This cannot be established by opinion. Abū ʿUmar said in al-Tamhīd: ‘Such a matter cannot be a matter of opinion; it can only rest upon Prophetic instruction, for, in terms of opinion and analogy, there is no difference between seven and fewer or more.’ Ibn Rushd said in al-Qawāʿid: ‘It is known that the practice of the Companions in this matter rested upon Prophetic instruction, since analogy has no place in it.’ A group of Companions and Successors concurred with Ibn Masʿūd in this. As for the Companions, we have already mentioned them; and as for the Successors, Ibn Abī Shaybah mentioned them in his Muṣannaf.”

I say: Are these not among the Muslims?! The correct view is that there is broad latitude concerning the takbīrs of