as in "Muʿjam al-Buldān," and it was mentioned that (al-Mughmas) is two-thirds of a parasang from Mecca and that it is a concealed place, either by hills or by trees.

The gates of the heavens open at midnight, and a caller announces: Is there anyone supplicating so that he may be answered? Is there anyone asking so that he may be given? Is there anyone in distress so that he may be relieved? No Muslim remains who supplicates with a supplication except that Allāh answers him, except for a woman who prostitutes herself or a tax collector. It was recorded by al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Awsaṭ" (1/88/2 - Zawāʾid al-Muʿjamayn): Ibrāhīm narrated to us, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn Salām narrated to us, Dāwūd ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-ʿAṭṭār narrated from Hishām ibn Ḥassān from Muḥammad ibn Sīrīn from ʿUthmān ibn Abī al-ʿĀṣ al-Thaqafī from the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) who said: and he mentioned it and said: "No one narrated it from Hishām except Dāwūd, and ʿAbd al-Raḥmān alone narrated it." I say: He is trustworthy, one of the teachers of Muslim, and those above him are trustworthy from the men of the two Shaykhs, and Ibrāhīm, the teacher of al-Ṭabarānī, is Ibn Hāshim Abū Isḥāq al-Bayʿ al-Baghawī, and he is trustworthy. Thus, the isnād is authentic. (Note) Al-Suyūṭī attributed it in "al-Jāmiʿ al-Ṣaghīr" and "al-Kabīr" (1/408/2) and was followed in "al-Fatḥ al-Kabīr" (2/33) to al-Ṭabarānī in "al-Muʿjam al-Kabīr," which is incorrect, and the correct attribution is "al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ" as previously mentioned, and it was correctly attributed by al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Haythamī in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (3/88) following al-Mundhirī in "al-Targhīb" (1/279). However, al-Haythamī made a more egregious error, as he presented the ḥadīth with three narrations, one of which he attributed to Aḥmad and the "Kabīr" of al-Ṭabarānī, this one to "al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ," and the other to "al-Kabīr." Then he said: "The men of Aḥmad are the men of the Ṣaḥīḥ except that there is ʿAlī ibn Zayd in it, and there is discussion about him, and he has been deemed trustworthy, and this ḥadīth has paths that will come in their appropriate places, if Allāh wills." I say: The error is clear, as he assumed that Ibn Zayd is also in the isnād of "al-Awsaṭ," which is not the case, as can be seen with the slightest reflection on the previously mentioned isnād. Al-Munāwī also fell into a similar error, as he quoted the aforementioned words of al-Haythamī under this ḥadīth, which al-Suyūṭī mistakenly attributed to the "Kabīr" of al-Ṭabarānī, and he agreed with him on it, so it is an error upon an error, and the one protected is the one whom Allāh protects