those among the esteemed contemporary scholars who have weakened it, and to those who have weakened the ḥadīth: "I have left among you two matters... the Book of Allāh and my sunnah..." from our good brothers—if Allāh wills—you will find in that a good example for reflection, despite both having a commendable level of knowledge in this science. So what can be said about those who speak on the authentication and weakening of ḥadīth without knowledge, but rather out of desire or blind imitation of someone who has no specialization in this noble science, nor any knowledge of it at all!! Like those who weaken the authentic ḥadīths about the Mahdī and the ḥadīths about ʿĪsá (peace be upon him) and others. See (p. 38), and some of them present ḥadīths in a way that deceives readers into thinking it is by their own pen, when it is by someone else, out of a desire for fame and to be called a ḥadīth scholar! There are many of these individuals, and their methods today are varied. Before me now is the first volume of the book "Mukhtaṣar Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr," abridged and verified by Muḥammad ʿAlī al-Ṣābūnī, which contains astonishing acts of theft under the guise of abridgment and verification, yet it contains nothing of verification. For the man has adopted a new style in claiming knowledge that he does not possess, as Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr, in his referencing of the ḥadīths in his "Tafsīr," has two methods for those not narrated by the two Shaykhs: the first is to present the ḥadīth with the isnād of its compiler from the authors of the Sunan, musnads, and tafāsīr. The other is to present the ḥadīth and attribute it to the compilers without mentioning the isnād. In both cases, he sometimes specifies the rank of the ḥadīth, which is one of the benefits of his "Tafsīr," and sometimes he remains silent, and in the first case, he is more often silent, and among its examples are