the narration of Wāṣil ibn Ayyūb al-Aswārī from Abū Hurayrah, stopping at him. As for al-Aswārī, I did not find anyone who mentioned him; nor did al-Samʿānī in this attribution. Likewise, al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Mundhirī also indicated its strengthening in "al-Targhīb" (1/109/14) by introducing it with his saying: "And from...", and his silence or acknowledgment of the authentication by al-Ḥākim and Ibn Shāhīn, and he mentioned a corroborating witness from the ḥadīth of Anas (raḍiya Allāhu ʿanhu), which I have included in the other book under number (5038), with an explanation of its weakness and al-Haythamī's criticism of it. As for this, he said in it (1/327): "It was narrated by al-Ṭabarānī in 'al-Kabīr', and al-Bazzār, and its men are trustworthy, but it is defective"! I said: he is referring to the disagreement regarding whether it is raised or stopped, and in the authentication of Ibrāhīm al-Saksakī, and I have clarified the statement on all of that, and explained—if Allāh wills—the correctness from the error. Then, on this occasion, I must say a word about this ḥadīth and the fiqh within it, so I say: It is not hidden from the people of knowledge that the adhān is a symbol of the symbols of Islam, and that many well-known ḥadīths have come regarding its virtue in "al-Ṣiḥāḥ" and "al-Sunan" and others. I intended here to examine this one among them for two reasons: the first is to verify the discussion on its isnād, and to consider those who authenticated it; did they hit the mark or err?! Then to judge it according to the scholarly ḥadīth principles as authentic, good, or weak, and I have done so, hoping from Allāh Almighty that I have been granted success in reaching the truth that pleases Him. The other: to remind of the disdain that has befallen this Islamic symbol, its neglect, lack of attention to it, and its abandonment in some mosques where the adhān should be raised from..