"Fabricated ḥadīths" (613), and he benefits greatly from it; but in silence! This becomes clear to anyone who compares my references in it with what he produces in "al-Madāwī," as he concealed the defect of this ḥadīth; exaggerating and misleading the readers, making them believe it is a credible witness! And if we assume that he was not aware of this defect; it would not be permissible for him to consider it a witness while being ignorant of the condition of one of its narrators; as is well known to scholars. Among his false claims and his misleading of his naive students is his statement following those false ḥadīths: "I said: al-Suyūṭī (may Allāh have mercy on him) overlooked a sound witness I found for this ḥadīth in 'al-Adab al-Mufrad' by al-Bukhārī..." He then presented it with its isnād, along with al-Ḥākim's narration that contradicts its text; and its supporting witness, dismissing all of it with a stroke of a pen, saying: "In my view, it is due to the narrators' manipulation, and the authentic version is what al-Bukhārī narrated (!); for (Dār al-Muqāmah) in the language of the sharīʿah refers to the Hereafter, not the worldly life. Also, there is no particularity of the desert over the city in this matter, as the ḥadīth according to al-Bukhārī (!) indicates asking for the companionship of the righteous in burial, thus it serves as a sound witness for the book's ḥadīth. And Allāh knows best"!! I say—and I seek Allāh's help—that I do not think—after all that has been mentioned—that the general readers, let alone the specialized ones, need further clarification to understand the falsehood of this statement with which the man concluded his authentication of the false ḥadīth with the anomalous ḥadīth. Nevertheless, I believe it is beneficial to refute it by clarifying the falsehood and deception it contains, and the misrepresentation of the wise legislator, so I say: Firstly, his statement: "For (Dār al-Muqāmah) in the language of the legislator refers to the Hereafter, not the worldly life"!