"when he reviewed it, he appreciated it and encouraged me to publish it"! What is the value of his appreciation, may Allāh have mercy on him, given that you know his level of knowledge?! Indeed, the wise and discerning person would sense with me the true value of this appreciated work from this appreciator!! My intention now is not to respond to this grandson in his "Iqāmah" and to clarify the ignorance of this knowledge, his contradictions in judgment, and his following of whims, for that has another place, if Allāh wills. Rather, I want to draw attention to the difference between the grandfather and the grandson from an ethical perspective. The grandfather, may Allāh have mercy on him, was content with responding to me in writing with great praise, as you will see below under the ḥadīth: (Blessed...), not intending by that to show off or gain fame by responding to al-Albānī. As for the grandson, he took a different path from his grandfather, out of a love for prominence. It has long been said: the love of prominence breaks backs. He did not contact me to inform me of his perspective, but instead asked me several questions over the phone, which I answered with complete honesty, as he himself recounted in "Iqāmah" (pp. 11-13), then he published it to the people with that grand title: ".. and in it is a response to the eminent shaykh Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Albānī"! He describes him (p. 11) as "the muḥaddith of the age"! If he is sincere with himself in this statement, as it appears, it is also apparent that he implies with that title that the one responding to al-Albānī must be "the muḥaddith of the ages"! His book is overflowing with selfishness, conceit, and arrogance. We ask Allāh, the Exalted, for safety from all afflictions in this world and the hereafter for us and for him. 2- A second example of some students daring to weaken the following ḥadīth: 613- (It is not befitting for a believer to humiliate himself...) the ḥadīth. I documented the ḥadīth there from the narration of Ḥudhayfah, and al-Tirmidhī deemed it good and I explained its defect. However, I strengthened it with a corroborating narration from Ibn ʿUmar, though I hesitated about one of its narrators, whether he is