that al-Fadaki has preserved its connection from ʿUmar. Although al-Dāraqutnī criticized it for being mursal by his previous statement, we do not know who the objector is. If the objector is more reliable than al-Fadaki, as al-Dāraqutnī's criticism suggests, then it is mursal. It can serve as supporting evidence, and the mursal is considered proof by some scholars, so at the very least, it can serve as supporting evidence for the ḥadīth of the chapter. As for what al-Haythamī said in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (1/153): "It was narrated by al-Bazzār, and in it is Muḥammad ibn Ṣadaqah al-Fadaki, who was said in 'al-Mīzān': His ḥadīth is munkar." I say: He means another ḥadīth mentioned in "al-Mīzān." As for this one, it is not munkar because, as you know, it was narrated by al-Ḥākim through a different route than al-Fadaki, with his previous isnād from ʿAbd al-Wāḥid ibn Abī ʿAwn from al-Qāsim ibn Muḥammad from Ibn ʿUmar. However, it was mentioned in "Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid" (9/370) through the narration of al-Ṭabarānī (meaning in "al-Kabīr" 13/192) from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Abī ʿAwn as muʿḍal, and he said: "Its isnād is ḥasan." Al-Ḥāfiẓ mentioned it in the biography of Ibn al-Arqam in "al-Iṣābah" from the narration of al-Baghawī through the route of al-Fadaki with a connected isnād similar to it, and he remained silent about it. In summary, the ḥadīth is good when considering both of its routes. And Allāh knows best.

- "Remember death in your prayer, for when a person remembers death in his prayer, he is likely to improve his prayer. Pray as if it is the prayer of a man who does not think he will pray another prayer, and beware of every matter that requires an apology." It was narrated by al-Daylamī in "Musnad al-Firdaws" (1/26/2) through Abū al-Shaykh ibn Ḥayyān: Ibn Abī ʿĀṣim narrated to us: My father narrated to us: Shabīb ibn Bishr narrated to us from Anas who said: The Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) said: and he mentioned it