and through his route, Ibn al-Sunnī (246/763), Ibn Mājah (3850), al-Bayhaqī in "Shuʿab al-Īmān" (3/338-339), and "al-Asmāʾ wa-al-Ṣifāt" (p. 55), al-Aṣbahānī in "al-Targhīb" (2/728/1772), and Aḥmad (6/170, 182, 183, 208) through various chains from Ibn Buraydah—some said: ʿAbd Allāh ibn Buraydah—from ʿĀʾishah who said: I said: O Messenger of Allāh! If I know which night is the Night of Decree, what should I say in it? He said: ... and he mentioned it. The context is from al-Nasāʾī and al-Tirmidhī, who said: "A ḥadīth ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ." Al-Mundhirī agreed in "al-Targhīb" (4/144), and al-Nawawī in "al-Adhkār" and "al-Majmūʿ" (6/447), and it is deserving of that; for ʿAbd Allāh ibn Buraydah is trustworthy among the narrators of the two Shaykhs. It was criticized with what does not undermine it, as al-Dāraqutnī said in "Sunan" (3/233)—and al-Bayhaqī followed him (7/118)—in another ḥadīth of ʿAbd Allāh ibn Buraydah: "He did not hear anything from ʿĀʾishah!" Thus they said! I had followed them for a period in criticizing the ḥadīth as being disconnected, in my treatise "Naqd Nuṣūṣ Ḥadīthiyyah" (p. 45), but now; I have retracted from that; because I have realized that the aforementioned negation is not supported by anything, rather it contradicts what has been established in the science of ḥadīth terminology that contemporaneity is sufficient to establish connection, provided there is no..