thus, the man continues in his delusion, criticizing the sunnah and those who defend it based solely on his (great!) intellect. And I do not know—by Allāh—how this man reasons—if we assume he has faith and intellect! How does he conceive that these esteemed imams, from the likes of al-Bukhārī to al-ʿAsqalānī, are mistaken in authenticating this ḥadīth, while he alone—with his great intellect!—is correct in weakening it and rejecting their judgment?! Then he does not stop at this! Rather, he deceives the readers and misleads them, making them believe he is in agreement with the imams, not opposing them. He says before denying this ḥadīth and others like it (p. 26): "There is no disagreement among Muslims regarding acting upon what is authentically attributed to the Messenger of Allāh (ṣallá Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-sallam) according to the principles of deduction established by the imams and reached by the ummah. The disagreement arises concerning the authenticity or invalidity of this attribution, which must be resolved, and any contrivance or affectation must be rejected. If the narrated report meets the conditions of authenticity established among the scholars, there is no reason to reject it. If there is a respectable disagreement about the fulfillment of these conditions, then there is room for flexibility." This is his statement, but did he adhere to it? Absolutely not; for there is no disagreement among scholars about the authenticity of the ḥadīth, and it has three authentic chains as previously mentioned. So how did he evade his own statement? He misled the readers and made it seem as though the ḥadīth's authenticity is disputed; he said (p. 27): "Some have debated its authenticity!" Meaning: that the ḥadīth falls into the category where there is room for disagreement! So we say to him: