and similarly in his book "Guidance for Seekers of Truth" (1/185-189). 1 - and what al-Nawawī confirmed in his mentioned books is what was adopted by a group of ḥadīth scholars and authors in the principles and terminology, among them: al-Ṭībī in his book "The Summary in the Principles of Ḥadīth" (p. 47), and al-ʿAlāʾī in "The Acquisition" (p. 210). 2 - and al-Dhahabī in his beneficial and concise treatise: "The Awakener," for although he mentioned both opinions: the meeting and contemporaneity, he agreed with Muslim in his refutation of his opponent, from one perspective. From another perspective, he indicated in his biography in "Siyar al-Nubalāʾ" (12/573) the correctness and strength of his position, while stating that al-Bukhārī's position is stronger. This is one thing, and the condition of authenticity is another, as is evident with minimal reflection. 3 - and the ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr in "The Abridgment of the Sciences of Ḥadīth." 4 - and Ibn al-Mulaqqin in "The Convincing in the Science of Ḥadīth" (1/148) and in his concise treatise "The Reminder" (16/11). 5 - and the ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar, for he preferred al-Bukhārī's condition similar to what was mentioned earlier about al-Dhahabī, for he accepted the correctness of Muslim's position, saying in "The Notes on Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ" (1/289) as evidence for the preference: "For even if we accept what Muslim mentioned regarding the ruling of continuity, it is clear that al-Bukhārī's condition is more apparent in continuity." He also said similarly in "The Introduction to Fatḥ al-Bārī" (p. 12) and similarly in his treatise "The Pleasure of Insight in Clarifying the Elite Thought" (p. 171/61 - with the notes of brother al-Ḥalabī on it). I say: and its clarity is without doubt, as well as its strength, as has been stated