that he may take what sustains him from any place he finds it, whether it belongs to individuals or the state, and it becomes lawful property for him. He is permitted to obtain it by force, and if the hungry person takes food to eat, it becomes his property! The error is very clear, for several reasons, the most important being its opposition to the ḥadīth, as the hungry person does not own the food he takes as long as he finds an alternative. Among them is that the needy person has legitimate ways he must follow, such as borrowing without interest, asking people for what suffices him according to the law, and other possible means. So why did the shaykh—may Allāh pardon him—disregard them and permit the individual to take money by force without requiring him to follow these legitimate ways?! I have no doubt that if the shaykh's opinion spread among the people, it would lead to corruptions whose consequences only Allāh knows.

- "Recite the Quran in seven modes, all of which are healing and sufficient." Narrated by al-Ḥarbī in "Gharīb al-Ḥadīth" (5/142/2): Musaddad narrated to us, Yaḥyá narrated to us from Ḥumayd from Anas as marfūʿ. I said: This isnād is authentic according to the criteria of al-Bukhārī, and Musaddad is Ibn Masrahd. He was contradicted in its isnād, indicating that it is from the mursal reports of Anas, but the mursal reports of the Companions are authentic as established in the science of terminology, especially since it has been confirmed that he received it from Ubayy ibn Kaʿb from the Prophet (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam). Imām Aḥmad said (5/114): Yaḥyá ibn Saʿīd narrated to us... from Anas that Ubayy said: "Nothing has troubled my heart since I embraced Islam except that I recited a verse..." and he mentioned the ḥadīth