Ibn Taymiyyah mentioned in his books that he had authenticated this ḥadīth in some of his refutations against his opponents, and Imām Aḥmad and others used it as evidence for the permissibility of visiting his grave (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam), but this is not the place to elaborate on that. As for the ḥadīth (954), it is said to contain a falsehood with two horns, as is said in some languages. It was claimed (p. 515) that its narrator, Ibn ʿAqīl, is "weak, all considered him weak except Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr... see (al-Tahdhīb)!" However, if the reader refers to "al-Tahdhīb," they will find that the imāms: Aḥmad, Ibn Rāhwayh, and al-Ḥumaydī used it as evidence. Are these not considered imāms in his view, or is it as the saying goes: "Your love for something blinds and deafens"? Furthermore, he ignored the statement of the ḥāfiẓ al-ʿAjlī in "Thiqāt" (277/880 - arrangement): "A trustworthy follower, his ḥadīth is acceptable." And the statement of Ibn al-Qaṭṭān after mentioning the disagreement about him: "His ḥadīth is ḥasan." He did not accept this statement, which is correct, while he relied on it to weaken the ḥadīth of al-ʿIrbāḍ, which is a mistake!! No one preceded him in this! He also ignored the statement of the ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī in "al-Mughnī": "His ḥadīth is ḥasan, Aḥmad and Isḥāq used it as evidence." And the statement of the ḥāfiẓ in "al-Taqrīb": "Truthful." And after that; the scope of discussing what the man did in "Riyāḍ al-Nawawī" and what he demolished of its authentic ḥadīths, and from the ḥadīths of "al-Ṣaḥīḥah," is very wide, so let us limit ourselves to what has been presented