and the other: that al-Bayhaqī narrated the ḥadīth with a sound chain from Shaybān ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Naḥwī from Qatādah: Anas ibn Mālik told us that Mālik ibn Ṣaʿṣaʿah narrated to them, mentioning the ḥadīth of the Ascension in full, including the obligation of the five prayers. Qatādah said: al-Ḥasan, meaning al-Baṣrī, told us that the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam)... I said: he mentioned the ḥadīth similar to the narration of the unknown narrators, but without the command for the adhān, and it included the quadrupling of the three prayers. Al-Bayhaqī said afterward: "In this ḥadīth, and what is narrated in its meaning, is evidence that this was in Makkah after the Ascension, and that the five prayers were obligated then with their numbers, and it is established from ʿĀʾishah (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhā) otherwise." Then al-Bayhaqī presented the ḥadīth of Muʿammar previously narrated by al-Bukhārī, and the ḥadīth of Dāwūd ibn Abī Hind from a third path from him, which I omitted mentioning there due to the previous two paths. I said: the aspect of contradiction is that Shaybān al-Naḥwī clarified in his narration from Qatādah from Anas that it does not include the mention of quadrupling that Qatādah narrated from al-Ḥasan in a disconnected manner. This means that al-Ḥasan added it to Anas, making it objectionable in this regard, so how can it be when it also contradicts the authentic ḥadīths previously referred to? 3 - As for his third ḥadīth, which he narrated from the path of Saʿīd from Qatādah from al-Ḥasan. You have already understood the response to it earlier, and thus it is deceitful to say: "a disconnected ḥadīth with a sound chain, and it is, along with the ḥadīth of Anas, a proof, as established in the science of ḥadīth and principles"! I said: he refers to their statement - and the wording is from al-Nawawī in "Taqrīb" (1/198 - with the explanation of "al-Tadrīb"):