The Shaykh’s response to the letter of Mahmoud Sa’id, and to the distortions of Abdullah al-Ghamari in his letter (The Open Page in the Prayer of the Traveler).

The Shaykh : ... which he imagines to be a counter-argument, and that is the hadith of Urwah from Aisha. In this manner and for this reason, he rejected the hadith of Ibn Umar and the hadith of Umar, which established that the prayer was reduced to two rak'ahs entirely, on the tongue of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). This is the hadith of Ibn Abbas in Sahih Muslim, which al-Ghamari also demolished, as well as the hadith of Umar or Ibn Umar with the same meaning. Whoever opposes the Sunnah is a disbeliever. Al-Ghamari rejected all these hadiths in a small letter that does not exceed twenty pages. And this poor man comes with a response to Al-Albani, the least of which can be said is that he exerted himself and erred, because he clung to the statement of the Imams regarding Umar ibn Hamzah and that he is weak, and so on. Then he strains in interpreting the hurtful words about this man, until al-Dhahabi brought this hadith in the biography of Umar ibn Hamzah, saying, "And this is what was censured in him." Why does he interpret "censured in him"? It means he ruled that he was unique in it, and that he is trustworthy. And in this manner the book proceeded, so I saw that I should address it in the introduction, because there is no longer a field in the main body where I can point out this hadith and what this doer did. And there are many, many hadiths of this type, unfortunately. I wished he would be sincere so that we could benefit from his sincerity, because without doubt, when a person is sincere and his condition is one of this severe hardship, something must happen, it must. And no one claims infallibility for himself, but I found him, unfortunately, malicious. This specific hadith follows the weak Umar ibn Hamzah, and the one narrated by Muslim. As I always try to be free from desire, I said at the end of the takhrij, because in reality, when I composed this letter, I mentioned the hadith and the text above, and below I said, "Narrated by Muslim." I said, "Then it became apparent to me that this chain contains Umar ibn Hamzah al-Aslami, and so on, and he is weak," and I mentioned some of the statements of the scholars. The point is, I said at the end, "And until now I have not found a corroborating narration that strengthens it, unlike..." and here is the point, pay attention, "unlike the following hadith, which is strong with its corroborating narrations." What did this wicked man do? He transferred this statement of mine to "And until now I have not found a corroborating narration," deleting what followed it. But this is not all; look at what he did after speaking in the manner of gathering from here and there, and bringing up this Umar ibn Hamzah, who without doubt one day will regret it and find hadiths of Umar ibn Hamzah that he cannot help but weaken. But the poor man does not know what he is doing at that time. In any case, after he finished authenticating Umar ibn Hamzah and validating this hadith in Sahih Muslim, because according to the rule he crossed the bridge, he transferred my statement that I had mentioned in the introduction to al-Tahawiyyah, that even if we say this, it is not accepted in its absolute sense, because the matter is as Imam al-Shafi'i said, as reported from him, "Allah refused to complete anything other than His Book," so infallibility is for His Book alone, and so on. He says that my first statement is on the right path, but this is a known Al-Albani confusion, and so on. After he finishes speaking about Umar ibn Hamzah, he says, "And it escapedThe Shaykh : Al-Albani that it has corroborating narrations that strengthen it.
Al-Halabi : And he brought the hadith of the devil and the she-devil.

The Shaykh : Yes, and he mentioned this, he mentioned it in the letter and strengthened it with corroborating narrations, and I added a corroborating narration that he did not mention. Do you see why he deleted the phrase "until now I have not found a corroborating narration, unlike the hadith that follows it," which he made a corroborating narration for the hadith of Umar ibn Hamzah? Knowing that this, in my expression which I believe I was the first to use, is a deficient corroborating narration. A deficient corroborating narration, and this is known from the terminology of the scholars of hadith that this corroborating narration in the chapter, for example, "The Chapter on the Prohibition of Disclosing Secrets," can be said to be in such a chapter; but it cannot be said that the hadith of the devil and the she-devil is a corroborating narration for that hadith which I say He makes the hadith of the devil and the she-devil and what is in its meaning a corroborating narration for the hadith of Umar ibn Hamzah, and it has no corroboration except at the point of intersection, which is the prohibition of disclosure. In my opinion, he does not have this understanding, meaning he does not have the fiqh of hadith to distinguish between a deficient corroboration and a complete corroboration, especially since this expression is not common in the books of hadith.
Al-Halabi : The supporting chains.

The Shaykh : But that is how it is, so glory be to Allah, I took the letter with me to the hospital so that I might be able to read it, but I could not, because, praise be to Allah, we were occupied with the visitors and the Muslims, until the doctors who slept in the hospital were holding a night gathering at my place. Yes, and praise be to Allah, a very great benefit was obtained.