detail, it is generally in agreement with what the aforementioned writer and others like him have objected to regarding the coexistence of disease and cure in the fly. It is not far-fetched that a day will come when the miracle of the Messenger (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) will be scientifically proven in the details mentioned, (and you will surely know its news after a while). And among the strange matters of this writer and his contradiction is that while he went on to weaken this ḥadīth, he also went on to authenticate the ḥadīth "The purification of a vessel in which a dog licks is to wash it seven times, one of which should be with soil," saying: "An authentic ḥadīth agreed upon." For if its authenticity came from the agreement of the scholars or the two Shaykhs on its authenticity, then the first ḥadīth is also authentic among the scholars without any disagreement among them. So how could he weaken this one and authenticate that one?! Then his false interpretation leads to the ḥadīth being incorrect in its meaning according to him, because he mentioned that the purpose of the number is merely abundance, and that the purpose of the soil is to use a substance with water that has the property of removing that effect! And this is a false interpretation, clearly false, even though he attributed it to Shaykh Maḥmūd Shaltūt, may Allāh forgive him. So I do not know which of his errors is greater, is it his weakening of the first ḥadīth which is authentic, or his interpretation of the other ḥadīth which is a false interpretation! On this occasion, I advise the esteemed readers not to trust everything written today in some popular magazines or widely circulated books on Islamic studies, especially those concerning the science of ḥadīth, unless it is by someone whose religion is trusted first, and then his knowledge and expertise in it second, for arrogance has prevailed among many writers of the present age, especially