" the author marked it as weak, and al-Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿIrāqī preceded him by explaining its defect, saying: 'In it is Mūsá ibn Wardān, who is disputed over.' End quote. And perhaps this is in relation to the path of Ibn ʿAdī, but as for the path of Abū Yaʿlá, al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Haythamī said: 'Its narrators are those of the authentic collections except for Ḍimām ibn Ismāʿīl, who is trustworthy.' End quote. Thus, it is known that the author's marking it as weak is not appropriate." I said: In this statement, there are considerations from several angles: Firstly, al-ʿIrāqī's statement about Ibn Wardān: "disputed over" is not a definitive weakening, but rather it is closer to strengthening than weakening, because their customary use of the phrase "disputed over" does not imply weakening. Instead, they indicate that his ḥadīth is ḥasan, or at least close to ḥasan, and they do not intend to weaken it outright, because the nature of a ḥasan ḥadīth is that there is some disagreement in its narration, otherwise it would be ṣaḥīḥ. Reflect on this. Secondly, al-Haythamī's statement "Its narrators are those of the authentic collections..." is not correct, for Mūsá ibn Wardān was not included by al-Bukhārī and Muslim in their "Ṣaḥīḥayn," but the former included him in "al-Adab al-Mufrad"! Thirdly, al-Manāwī's inclination that the path of Abū Yaʿlá does not include the mentioned Mūsá is incorrect, as indicated by our aforementioned extraction at the beginning of this investigation, so take advantage of it, for it is rare and precious. The ḥadīth is in "Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim" and others through another path from Abū Hurayrah, raised and abbreviated with the wording: "Prompt your dying ones with 'There is no deity but Allāh.'" From the understanding of the ḥadīth: It indicates the legitimacy of prompting the dying with the testimony of tawḥīd, hoping that they will say it and succeed