First: As for impugning the hadith, this is utterly baseless; for it is the way of the innovators and the scholars of speculative theology. You have already seen that its transmitters are trustworthy and precise.

Second: As for interpreting it along the lines of the verse concerning recitation, this might have been acceptable were it not for the fact that the مجموع of the narrations from ʿUqayl refutes it—especially the previously cited narration of Ibn Ḥibbān, which reads:

“He brought his palms together, then blew lightly into them, then recited.”

Similarly, Aḥmad’s narration states:

“…then he would blow lightly into them, and then recite.”

These reports explicitly establish the order mentioned and admit of no interpretation.

Third: As for the claim that no one has held this view and that there is no benefit in it, it is as baseless as impugning the hadith itself. For it is not permissible for a Muslim to say of acting upon what has been authentically reported in a hadith, “There is no benefit in it,” as is evident.

As for the assertion that no one acted upon it, that is mere conjecture about the unseen. May Allah have mercy on Imam Aḥmad, who said: “Whoever claims consensus has lied. How could he know? Perhaps they differed.”

Fourth: What he quoted from al-Ḥāfiẓ is found in al-Fatḥ (10/210), in the commentary on the previously mentioned hadith of al-Uwaysī. It too is an interpretation that conflicts with the authentic narration to which reference was made above, as well as with its explanation—that it was done in order to differ from sorcerers—as al-Ṭībī stated earlier.

Moreover, I can scarcely see any difference between blowing lightly before reciting and wiping a sick person with one’s hand before reciting, as in the hadith of ʿĀʾishah as well. She said:

“Whenever one of us fell ill, the Messenger of Allah would wipe him with his right hand and then say: ‘Remove the affliction, Lord of mankind…’” The hadith.