= Its defect. In fact, the report is defective for several reasons: First: There is disagreement over the wording “and he would not move it.” Ziyad b. Saʿd is the only transmitter who relates this additional phrase from Ibn ʿAjlan. In contrast, al-Layth b. Saʿd and Abu Khalid al-Ahmar (as cited by Muslim and al-Bayhaqi), Sufyan b. ʿUyaynah (al-Darimi 1/308; Ahmad 4/3), and Yahya b. Saʿid (likewise, and also in Abu Dawud and al-Nasai) all report the hadith from Ibn ʿAjlan without this extra wording. Second: ʿUthman b. Hakim likewise narrates the hadith from ʿAmir without the addition, and he is supported by Makhramah b. Bukayr (al-Nasai 1/173; al-Bayhaqi 2/132). Thus everyone who transmits the hadith from ʿAmir omits the phrase, except for this solitary route through Ibn ʿAjlan, which is therefore anomalous (shadh), as explained above. Ibn al-Qayyim (1/85) observes: “The authenticity of this addition is questionable. Muslim records the full hadith in his Sahih yet leaves out this wording. Moreover, the report does not state that the incident occurred during prayer; and even if it did, it would be a negation, whereas the narration of Waʾil is an affirmation—and the affirmative takes precedence. The hadith is sound; Abu Hatim includes it in his Sahih.” A supporting chain for the finger-movement narration appears in Ibn ʿAdi (1/287), but he says of its transmitter ʿUthman b. Miqsam: “Weak; his hadith is merely written down.” Regarding the phrase “and he would supplicate with it,” Imam al-Tahawi comments in Sharh al-Maʿani (1/153): “This indicates that the action took place at the end of the prayer.” I add: this is because, according to the majority—contrary to Ibn Hazm, as will be shown—the legislated time for supplication is during the final tashahhud, the one that immediately precedes the taslim, as is established in the sunnah; hence it also demonstrates that the sunnah