He cites this report in al-Talkhis (3/306). Yet even apart from the fact that it never expressly places the Prophet’s seeking-refuge inside the prayer itself, the report is mursal and, as such—especially since it belongs to the mursal traditions of al-Hasan al-Basri—carries no probative force according to the majority of hadith scholars. Despite this, the Shafi‘i jurists—save for a small minority—have held that the optimal formula is to restrict oneself to nothing more than this brief wording of the isti‘adha, arguing on the basis of the Qur’anic verse, “When you recite the Qur’an, seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Satan” (16:98). It is obvious, however, that the verse is general and does not spell out the exact wording of the refuge-prayer; consequently one must turn to the Sunnah for clarification. You have already seen that the Sunnah establishes a longer version, which is preferable to adopt, all the more so because it conveys an additional meaning. Some Shafi‘is acknowledged this point. Thus al-Rafi‘i writes in Sharh al-Wajiz (3/305): “Qadi al-Ruyani transmitted from certain of our colleagues that the better wording is: ‘I seek refuge in Allah, the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing, from the accursed Satan.’” He then ends the citation. Even better is to add the phrase, “from his hamz, his nafkh, and his nafth.” From what has been presented, it is clear that Ibn al-Qayyim’s statement in Zad al-Ma‘ad (1/73)—“After that he would say: ‘I seek refuge in Allah from the accursed Satan,’ and then recite al-Fatihah”—is incomplete, for his book is not intended to champion any particular legal school but rather to set out the Prophet’s practice in worship and elsewhere. The scholars differ over the legal ruling of the isti‘adha; some relevant discussion will follow shortly.