It was recorded by al-Bukhārī (3268, 5763, 5765, 5766, 6391), Muslim (7/14), Ibn Abī Shaybah (8/30/3570), and through his route by Ibn Mājah (3590 - al-Aʿẓamī), Aḥmad (6/50, 57, 63, 96), al-Ḥumaydī (259), Ibn Saʿd (2/196), Abū Yaʿlá (3/194), and al-Bayhaqī (2/2/157/2) from various routes from Hishām. The addition of six months mentioned in the ḥadīth of the chapter is found in one of Aḥmad's narrations, and its chain is authentic, as verified by al-Ḥāfiẓ in "al-Fatḥ" (10/226). In summary, the ḥadīth of al-ʿArzamī and its additions are very objectionable, except for what agrees with the ḥadīth of Hishām from ʿUrwah, and the ḥadīth of the chapter, including the revelation of (the two protective chapters), which al-Rāfiʿī mentioned in his book. Al-Ḥāfiẓ said in his "Talkhīṣ" (4/40): "This was mentioned by al-Thaʿlabī in his 'Tafsīr' from the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿAbbās as a suspended narration, and from the ḥadīth of ʿĀʾishah also as a suspended narration. The route of ʿĀʾishah is authentic, recorded by Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah in his 'Tafsīr' as narrated by Abū ʿUbayd Allāh from him from Hishām ibn ʿUrwah from his father from ʿĀʾishah - and he mentioned the ḥadīth - and in it: *Say, 'I seek refuge in the Lord of daybreak'*." This is an important benefit from al-Ḥāfiẓ, may Allāh have mercy on him, not mentioned in his book "Fatḥ al-Bārī", and it is a strong support for the ḥadīth of the chapter. And Allāh knows best. It is useful to mention that some innovators, both in the past and present, have denied this authentic ḥadīth with objections weaker than a spider's web, and scholars have refuted them in their commentaries, so whoever wishes may refer to them. The commentator on "al-Dalāʾil" made a grave error by attributing al-Bayhaqī's narration to the two Shaykhs and others, without pointing out the objectionable elements that contradict their narrations!