16. Another distortion of hadith by Tijani

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents

 

16. Another distortion of hadith by Tijani

 

Tijani says:

 

They claim that some of the early Companions were not reliable transmitters of the Prophet’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam tradition; therefore they removed what they did not like, especially if these traditions included some of the last instructions of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam before his death.

Al Bukhari and Muslim both write about the fact that the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam advised three things on his death-bed:

  • Remove all the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula
  • Reward the delegation in the same way as I have done and the narrator then said, “I forgot the third.”

It is possible that those Companions who were present at the death-bed and heard the three instructions forgot the third one, when we know that they used to learn by heart a whole epic after hearing it once? No. It is politics that forced them to forget it and not to mention it again. This is indeed another of those comedies organized by the Companions, because there is no doubt about the first instruction of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[1]

 

Our comment:

Tijani does not realise that this hadith is a portion of the hadith which he calls, “The Thursday Calamity.” Tijani has either taken this narration from the books of the Shia, or he has deliberately manipulated the texts. How else can one reconcile a condemnation of the Sahabah from a ‘forged’ hadith?

It also proves that the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did not expel them from his room. How else would they be able to relate this information? More significant is the fact that the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam made these bequests to the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum after he decided against ‘writing something which would cause them never to go astray after him.’ This hadith is one of the clearest proofs that the intention behind writing the book was not imperative but a personal choice. It exonerates ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu from any accusations of misconduct since the demeanour of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam indicates that ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu had understood the situation correctly.

The person who said, “I forgot the third,” is the Tabi’i, Sa’id ibn Jubair. In one narration it appears as follows, “He remained silent about the third or he said, ‘I forgot it.’” So, the narrator who forgot was Sa’id ibn Jubair, and he was not a Sahabi. Thus, Tijani’s statement, “Is it conceivable that the Sahabah present, who heard the Prophet’s three bequests and the time of his death, forgot the third bequest,” is actually egg on his face since the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum did not forget the hadith. Instead, the narrator, Sa’id ibn Jubair, who narrated the hadith from the Sahabah, was the one who forgot it. How could the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum be held responsible for one of the narrators forgetting a part of the hadith?

 

NEXT ⇒ 17. Tijani claims that the differences between the four Imams is symptomatic of contradiction between Qur’an and Hadith


[1]Then I was guided, p. 163