Thus, the man persists in his error, attacking the sunnah and those who defend it on the strength of nothing but his own (great!) intellect. By Allah, I do not know—assuming this man possesses faith and reason—how he can possibly imagine that these eminent imams, among hadith scholars and jurists—from Imam al-Bukhari to Imam al-Asqalani—were mistaken in authenticating this hadith, while he alone, the possessor of the great intellect, is correct in declaring it weak and rejecting their judgment!

Nor does he stop at this. Rather, he deceives and misleads the readers, giving them the impression that he stands with the imams and does not differ from them. Thus, before denying this hadith and others like the preceding one, he says (p. 26):

“There is no disagreement among Muslims regarding acting upon what has been authentically attributed to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, in accordance with the principles of legal inference established by the imams and accepted by the Ummah. Disagreement arises only over whether this attribution is true or false—a disagreement that must be decisively settled, and in which contrivance and forced interpretation must be rejected. If a narrated report fulfills the conditions of authenticity established among the scholars, there is no justification for rejecting it. But if a respectable disagreement arises over whether these conditions have been met, then the matter allows latitude.”

Those are his words; but does he abide by them? No, indeed not. For there is no disagreement among the scholars regarding the authenticity of this hadith, and it has three authentic chains of transmission, as mentioned above. So how did he evade the implications of his own statement? He deceived the readers and gave them the impression that the hadith’s authenticity is disputed, saying (p. 27):

“Some have disputed its authenticity!”

That is, he means that the hadith has become one of those matters in which disagreement is allowed. So we say to him: