Hadith al-Tayr Part I: The Hadith that Terrified Sunnis
- Anonymous
- Jun 23
- 32 min read
Updated: Oct 7
« Next Part: Hadith al-Tayr Part II: What This Hadith Really Proves »
Full Context of Hadith al-Tayr
Hadith Al Tayr is generally considered to become very controversial just from its famous phrasing. However, it becomes even more controversial when we read the report with the full context, which we shall construct using 3 different variants of the report.
Firstly, Rasulullah (saw) was offered by either Umm Salamah (sa) or Asma bt. Umays (sa) 3 different birds. As the bird was cooking, the Prophet (saw) raised his hand in du’a and asked God to bring him His most beloved of creation to eat one of the birds with him.
We read from Musnad Abi Ya’la, quoted in Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani’s Matalib al-Aliyah, Vol. 16, pg. 108, H. # 3935:
وَقَالَ أَبُو يَعْلَى: حدثنا قَطَنُ بْنُ نَسِيرٍ، ثنا جَعْفَرُ بْنُ سُلَيْمَانَ، عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ الْمُثَنَّى، عَنْ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَنَس:
أَنَسٍ رَضِيَ الله عَنْه قَالَ: أُهْدِيَ لِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وسَلَّمَ حَجَلٌ مَشْوِيٌّ بِخُبْزَةٍ وظبابة فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّم: " اللَّهُمَّ ائْتِنِي بِأَحَبِّ خَلْقِكَ إِلَيْك يَأْكُلُ مَعي منْ هَذَا الطَّعَامِ،
فقالت عائشة رَضِيَ الله عَنْها: اللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْهُ أَبِي. وقالت حفصة رَضِيَ الله عَنْها: اللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْهُ أَبِي. قَالَ أَنَسٌ رَضِيَ الله عَنْه: فَقُلْتُ: اللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْهُ سَعْدَ بْنَ عُبَادَةَ.
قَالَ: فَسَمِعْتُ حَرَكَةً بِالْبَابِ فَخَرَجْتُ فَإِذا علِيٌّ رَضِيَ الله عَنْه، فَقُلْتُ: إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَلى حَاجَةٍ. فَانْصَرَف، ثُمَّ سَمِعْتُ حَرَكَةً الباب فَخَرَجْتُ فَإِذَا عَلِيٌّ رَضِيَ الله عَنْه كَذَلِكَ فَسَمِعَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْه وَسَلَّمَ صَوْتهُ فَقَالَ: " انْظُرْ مَنْ هَذَا؟ ".
فَخَرَجْتُ فَإِذَا عَلِيٌّ رَضِيَ الله عَنْه، فَجِئْتُ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ / فَأَخبرتُهُ فَقَالَ: " اللَّهُمَّ وإِلَيَّ اللَّهُمَ وَإِلَيَّ
Abu Ya'la said: Qatan b. Nasir narrated to us, Ja'far b. Sulayman narrated to us, from Abdullah b. al-Muthanna, from Ubaydullah b. Anas:
Anas said: A roasted meat with bread was presented to Rasulullah (saw) and he said: "O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creatures to partake in this meal with me."
Aisha said: "O Allah, make it my father." Hafsa said: "O Allah, make it my father." Anas said: "So I said: O Allah, make it Sa'd ibn Ubadah."
Anas said: "Then I heard a movement at the door, so I went out and found Ali (as).” I said to him: “Verily, the Holy Prophet (saw) is attending to something (busy). So Ali turned back and departed. Then I heard a movement at the door again, so I went out and found Ali again. This time, the Holy Prophet (saw) heard his voice and said: “See who that is?”.
So I went out and it was Ali (as). I returned to the Holy Prophet and informed him. He said: 'O God, and to me [he is the most beloved as well], O God, and to me [he is the most beloved as well]'"
This report highlights 3 things: After the Prophet made this prayer, Aisha, Hafsa and Anas each prayed that it would be someone from their own people who would come to eat the bird with the Prophet (saw). Anas went a step further by trying to prevent Ali from entering the house 3 or 4 different times, attempting to delay or discourage him from arriving. Eventually, Ali (as) raised his voice, causing the Prophet to hear it, but this version does not state why. Note: This Hadith does not exist in the current version of Musnad Abi Ya’la for some reason.
In another version, also recorded in Musnad Abi Ya’la, vol. 7, pg. 105 - 106:
حدثنا الحسن بن حماد ، حدثنا مسهر ابن عبد الملك بن سلع - ثقة - حدثنا عيسى بن عمر ، عن إسماعيل السدي ، عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكِ:
أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ ﷺ كَانَ عِنْدَهُ طَائِرٌ فَقَالَ: اللَّهُمَّ ائْتِنِي بِأَحَبِّ خَلْقِكَ يَأْكُلُ مَعِي مِنْ هَذَا الطَّير » . فَجَاءَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ فَرَدَّهُ ، ثُمَّ جَاءَ عُمَرُ فَرَدَّهُ ، ثُمَّ جَاءَ عَلِيٌّ فَأَذِن له.
Al-Hasan b. Hammad narrated to us, Musahhar b. Abd al-Malik b. Sala‘ (thiqah), narrated to us, from Isa b. Umar, from Isma‘il al-Suddi, from Anas b. Malik:
The Prophet (saw) had with him a bird, and he said: “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation who will eat with me from this bird.” Then Abu Bakr came, but he was turned away. Then Umar came, but he was turned away. Then Ali came, and he was granted permission.
We find an additional detail here: When the Prophet (saw) made this prayer, both Abu Bakr and Umar tried to enter but they were turned away. We see clearly here that everything was being done to try and prevent Ali (as) from having this title and honour granted, yet the prayer of the Holy Prophet (saw) was not going to be denied by Allah (swt).
The last report we mention will be in llal al-Mutanahiya, vol. 1, pg. 234 - 235:
أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ مَرْدَوَيْهِ قَالَ نا فَهْدُ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ الْبَصْرِيُّ قَالَ نا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ زَكَرِيَّا قَالَ نا الْعَبَّاسُ بْنُ بَكَّارٍ الضَّبِّيُّ قَالَ نا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ الْمُثَنَّى الْأَنْصَارِيُّ عَنْ عَمِّهِ ثُمَامَةَ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ:
أَنَّ أُمَّ سَلَمَةَ ضُيِّفَ لِرَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ طَيْرًا أَوْ ضِبَاعًا فَبَعَثَ إِلَيْهِ فَلَمَّا وُضِعَ بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ قَالَ:" اللَّهُمَّ جِئْنِي بِأَحَبِّ خَلْقِكَ إِلَيْكَ يَأْكُلُ مَعِي مِنْ هَذَا الطَّيْرِ.
فَجَاءَ عَلِيُّ بْنُ أَبِي طَالِبٍ فَقَالَ لَهُ أَنَسٌ إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ عَلَى حَاجَةٍ فَرَجَعَ عَلِيٌّ وَاجْتَهَدَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ فِي الدُّعَاءِ قَالَ اللَّهُمَّ جِئْنِي بِأَحَبِّ خلقك إِلَيْكَ وَأَوْجَهِهِمْ عِنْدَكَ فَجَاءَ عَلِيٌّ فَقَالَ لَهُ أَنَسٌ إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ عَلَى حَاجَةٍ
قَالَ أَنَسٌ فَرَفَعَ عَلِيٌّ يَدَهُ فَرَكَزَ فِي صَدْرِي ثُمَّ دَخَلَ فَلَمَّا نَظَرَ إِلَيْهِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَامَ قَائِمًا فَضَمَّهُ إِلَيْهِ وَقَالَ يَا رَبِّ وَالِ يَا رَبِّ وَالِ مَا أَبْطَأَ بِكَ يَا عَلِيُّ
قَالَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَدْ جِئْتُ ثَلاثًا كُلُّ ذَلِكَ يَرُدُّنِي أَنَسٌ قَالَ أَنَسٌ فَرَأَيْتُ الْغَضَبَ فِي وَجْهِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَقَالَ يَا أَنَسُ مَا حَمَلَكَ عَلَى رَدِّهِ؟ قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ سَمِعْتُكَ تَدْعُو فَأَحْبَبْتُ أَنْ تَكُونَ الدَّعْوَةُ فِي الأَنْصَارِ قَالَ لَسْتَ بِأَوَّلِ رَجُلٍ أَحَبَّ قَوْمَهُ أَبَى اللَّهُ يَا أَنَسُ إِلا أَنْ يَكُونَ ابْنَ أَبِي طَالِبٍ".
Abu Bakr ibn Mardawayh said: Fahl ibn Ibrahim al-Basri narrated to us, he said: Muhammad ibn Zakariyya narrated to us, he said: al-Abbas ibn Bakkar al-Dabbi narrated to us, he said: Abdullah ibn al-Muthanna al-Ansari from his uncle Thumamah ibn Abdullah from Anas ibn Malik:
Umm Salamah once hosted the Messenger of Allah ﷺ with a bird. When it was placed before him, he said: “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You who will eat this bird with me.”
So Ali ibn Abi Talib came, but Anas told him, “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ is occupied.” Ali turned back. The Prophet continued to supplicate, saying: “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You, the most esteemed in Your sight.” Ali came again, and again Anas told him, “The Messenger of Allah ﷺ is occupied.”
Anas said: Ali then raised his hand, pressed it into my chest, and entered. When the Messenger of Allah ﷺ saw him, he stood up, embraced him, and said: “O Lord, befriend him! O Lord, befriend him! What kept you, O Ali?”
He replied: “O Messenger of Allah ﷺ , I came three times, and each time Anas turned me away.” Anas said: I saw the anger on the face of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and he said: “O Anas, what made you turn him away?” I said: “O Messenger of Allah, I heard you supplicating, and I wished that the prayer would be answered in favor of one of the Ansar.” He ﷺ said: “You are not the first man to love his people. But Allah, O Anas, refused except that it be the son of Abu Talib.”
This last variant fills in the missing detail: Imam Ali (as) became angry at the number of times Anas turned him away from the Prophet (saw), until he eventually grabbed Anas by the chest and raised his voice in anger over being prevented from entering upon the Prophet (saw). The Prophet (saw) heard the commotion, asked Ali to come, and became upset with Anas for refusing to let Ali enter.
Putting these three variants together gives us the full picture & context of the report. We must note that the prayer of Rasulullah (saw) is never rejected as this is one of his great noble attributes recorded in Sunan an-Nasa'i 2556:
اشْفَعُوا تُشَفَّعُوا وَيَقْضِي اللَّهُ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ عَلَى لِسَانِ نَبِيِّهِ مَا شَاءَ.
"Intercede [through me] and your intercession may be accepted, and Allah, the Mighty and Sublime, decrees on the lips of His Prophet whatsoever He will."
When the Prophet, therefore, asked for the most beloved creature of Allah to come to Him, no matter what people do, no one except that specific person can come to him.
How Sunnis Approach Hadith al-Tayr
When the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah found this Hadith, in usual fashion, they decided to agree upon its falsehood for a wide variety of weak reasons, yet they miserably failed to show any consistency.
For instance, some Sunni scholars have attempted to weaken all versions of the narration, even when certain chains are clearly authentic and others strongly corroborated. At other times, they dismiss reports solely based on the madhhab of a narrator, as if such a reason holds weight when the narrators are proven reliable and supported by non-Shi’a sources. When these efforts prove insufficient, they often resort to deeming the report ‘impossible’, despite accepting similarly worded narrations concerning their own figures. The double standard in this approach is both evident and telling.
Let us go through a list of ways that Sunnis have tried to dismiss this report and evaluate their reasoning of whether it is valid or not.
Weakening Hadith al-Tayr
The very first and the most common excuse a Sunni will give you about Hadith al-Tayr is claiming that all the chains of this report are weak. However, the problems with this baseless claim are too numerous to count.
To begin with, some early Sunni scholars, quite astonishingly, sought to weaken narrators solely on the basis that they transmitted this very Hadith. Such a rationale is entirely unfounded by any standard of Hadith methodology. Merely reporting a narration does not, in itself, constitute evidence of fabrication or distortion.
Nevertheless, driven by desperation in the face of multiple clear and authentic chains for Hadith al-Tayr, they felt compelled to fabricate justifications to discredit and undermine the credibility of these narrators. Given such a glaring display of intellectual dishonesty, one must seriously question the reliability and objectivity of these so-called scholars and researchers in their evaluation and grading of Hadith al-Tayr.
Consider the following narrators:
Maymun b. Jabir Abi Khalaf narrates Hadith al-Tayr in Tarikh Dimashq, vol. 42, pg. 250 - 251.
When we read Ibn Abi Hatim’s Jarh wal-Ta’dil, vol. 8, pg. 267, we find the following mentioned about Maymun:
ميمون أبو خلف الرفاء روى عن أنس بن مالك قصة الطير روى عنه سكين بن عبد العزيز نا عبد الرحمن قال سألت أبا زرعة عنه فقال منكر الحديث وترك حديثه ولم يقرأ علينا.
Maymun Abu Khalaf al-Rafa’ narrated from Anas b. Malik the story of the bird. Sakin b. Abd al-Aziz narrated from him. Abd al-Rahman said: I asked Abu Zur‘ah about him, and he said: “His hadith is rejected (munkar al-hadith), and his narration was abandoned; it was not read to us.”
Maymun’s transmission of Hadith al-Tayr proved so troubling to Ibn Abi Hatim that he felt compelled to explicitly reference it, and it would not be surprising if that was the sole reason he was weakened for. One must ask: why single out this Hadith among the many others Maymun narrated? Countless transmitters related Hadith al-Tayr, and Maymun himself reported a variety of narrations, yet this particular report was uniquely highlighted.
The implication is clear: Hadith al-Tayr adversely impacted Maymun’s reliability in Ibn Abi Hatim’s assessment. This shows that the Sunni hadith corpus is unreliable when evaluators systematically undermine transmitters simply for narrating reports that challenge their doctrinal commitments. Their criticisms appear less motivated by objective methodological standards and more by a desire to suppress inconvenient narrations.
This calls into question the credibility of such scholarship, which seems more concerned with preserving theological narratives than conducting honest assessments of narrators.
Isma’il al-Azzraq narrates Hadith al-Tayr in Musnad al-Bazzar. Vol. 14, pg. 80 - 81.
However, when we read his biography in Kamil Fi al-Du’afa, vol. 2, pg. 53 by Ibn Udayy, we read:
قال الشيخ: وإسماعيل بن سلمان هذا قد روى عَن أَنَس أَيضًا حديث الطير في فضائل علي رضوان اللَّه عليه وغيره من الأحاديث.
The Shaykh (Ibn Udayy) said: And this Isma‘il b. Salman also narrated from Anas the ḥadīth of the bird concerning the virtues of ‘Alī (as) and other reports as well.
We ask again: Why did Ibn Udayy feel the need to explicitly mention that he narrated Hadith al-Tayr? He had to make the fact that he narrated Hadith al-Tayr clear to his reader. This truly shows that Sunni Hadith science was never about who was reliable and truthful, it was always about how well a narrator managed to censor what Ahlus Sunnah dislikes!
Ahmad b. Sa’id b. Farqad al-Judi narrates Hadith al-Tayr in ‘llal al-Mutanahiya, vol. 1, pg. 233 - 234 by Ibn al-Jawzi.
His case is the worst of them all. Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani blatantly admits that the only reason Ahmad was accused of fabrication was because the rest of the chain for Hadith al-Tayr was authentic. He had to be weakened just to reject the Tayr report.
We read in Lisan al-Mizan, Vol. 1, pg. 469, Bio # 525:
احمد بن سعيد بن فرقد الجدي، روى عن أبي حمة، وعنه الطبراني، فذكر حديث الطير باسناد الصحيحين فهو المتهم بوضعه انتهى.
Ahmad b. Sa’id b. Farqad al-Jaddi narrated from Abu Hamma, and from him al-Tabarani. He reported the hadith of the bird with an isnad like that of the two Sahihs, so he is the one accused of fabricating it. End.
These examples would be the few of the very many, where Sunni scholars weakened narrators purely because they narrated a specific Hadith or an event they didn't like or aligned with their school of thought.
How can such a principle be endorsed and so widespread amongst their major scholars? Surely this should concern any sincere seeker of truth about how unreliable their Hadith corpus is.
Al-Suddi, who is a famous narrator of Hadith al-Tayr, narrates the tradition in Jami’ at-Tirmidhi 3721.
Isma’il al-Suddi is a famous reliable narrator for Ahlus Sunnah who we will cover further in Part 3, Insha'Allah, but he is a famous narrator of Hadith al-Tayr who Sunni scholars attempt to weaken for that sole reason.
Just consider this hilarious contradiction of Al-Albani, where in one hadith where al-Suddi narrated, Al-Albani says he’s reliable; Silsalat al-Ahadith al-Sahiha, vol. 7, pg. 997:
قلت : وهذا إسناد جيد ، ورجاله كلهم ثقات ، وفي السدي - واسمه إسماعيل بن عبدالرحمن - كلام يسير لا يضر ، وهو من رجال مسلم . وأما إعلال المعلق على «المسند»
I said: This isnād is good, and all its narrators are trustworthy. As for al-Suddī – whose name is Ismāʿīl b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān – there is minor criticism concerning him, but it does not harm, and he is among the narrators of Muslim.
Yet, when he covers the narration of Hadith al-Tayr, Al-Albani says the following about al-Suddi in Silsalat al-Ahadith al-Dha’ifa, vol. 14, pg. 174:
وهذا إسناد رجاله كلهم ثقات إلا ما في السدي من الخلاف وهو السدي الكبير واسمه إسماعيل بن عبد الرحمن وبه أعله ابن الجوزي فقال: وهذا لا يصح لأن إسماعيل السدي قد ضعفه عبد الرحمن بن مهدي ويحيى بن معين.
This isnād’s narrators are all trustworthy, except for the disagreement over al-Suddī – the major Suddī, whose name is Ismāʿīl b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān – and Ibn al-Jawzī criticized it on that basis, saying: “This is not authentic, because Ismāʿīl al-Suddī was declared weak by ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. Mahdī and Yaḥyā b. Maʿīn.”
Masha'Allah! When al-Suddi is narrating other traditions, he is reliable and there’s no issue, but the moment he narrates Hadith al-Tayr, al-Suddi becomes weak and is not to be relied upon. He’s truthful and reliable in every Hadith except this one for some reason. The inconsistency is glaring and frankly exposes the deep flaws and subjectivity within the Sunni hadith grading system.
Thus, we conclude with two responses. Firstly, the excuse of weakness is invalid, as certain narrators are deemed weak merely for having transmitted the report, which is not a rationally sound argument. Secondly, the report is mutawatir and therefore is not limited by weaknesses found in the chains.
“The Heart disagrees with it!”
This next justification for rejecting Hadith al-Tayr that we are about to address is one of the most absurd ones yet. The second strategy Sunni scholars use in rejecting this Hadith is implementing a rather strange and bizarre principle, which is: judging a Hadith based on whether it ‘agrees with the heart.’ In other words, if your “heart” feels falsehood for a report, then that is somehow a valid ground to reject it. Ajeeb! Since when did their “hunches” become a standard in their Hadith science?
Just refer to Ibn Kathir, where he goes to mention that 90 of the Tabi’in narrated this report from Anas b. Malik but concludes with the following in al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah, Vol. 11, pg. 75 - 83:
وَبِالْجُمْلَةِ فَفِي الْقَلْبِ مِنْ صِحَّةِ هذا الحديث نظر وإن كثرت طرقه واللَّه أَعْلَمُ.
In summary, there is something in my heart that stops me from authenticating this hadith despite the numerous pathways and Allah knows best.
Is this actually how the Sunni Hadith system works? Using the heart as a measurement for truth? If this is the grading system, then anyone can manipulate it to serve their sectarian agenda. So if this is the reasoning Ahlus Sunnah have given for rejecting Hadith al-Tayr, then why should we care or refer back to their scholars about this Hadith at all? What authority do they exactly hold over us when their “proof” is what pleases and aligns with their heart?
In response to this disease, our honoured Al-’Allama al-Amini (qadas Allah ruha) says in his Kitab al-Ghadir, Vol. 3, pg. 227:
This heart [of yours] has been sealed by Allah (swt) for there should be no reason to question its authenticity after fulfilling all the conditions for its validity! It is not an innovation for anyone to hold a deep affection for the Prophet Muhammad (saw) nor does anyone have the right to criticize or object to this. How much more so for someone like Imam Ali (as) whose virtues and merits are undeniable, being the Prophet's cousin, brother, and closest companion? His special status, closeness to the Prophet, and his excellence are all abundantly clear, without any veils. We will delve into the hadith and its numerous authentic chains of transmission, and we will inform you that questioning its authenticity is indicative of Umayyad bias, a sign of a diseased heart, and following personal desires.
The scholars of Ahlus Sunnah often follow this style of research, that when they stumble upon something not agreeing and aligning with their “biased” beliefs, they will straight up reject it, not because it is untrue, but rather because they do not want it to be true. The idea of discovering the objective truth is thrown out the window for the sake of preserving their baseless beliefs.
Al-Sayyid Ali Husayni al-Milani (daama dhiluh al-Sharif) further expands on this critique in his Muhadhirat Fil I’tiqadat, vol. 1, pg. 240 - 241:
I say: Ibn Kathir’s only proof for weakening this hadith is that his heart does not accept it. His heart cannot accept this hadith, just as the heart of Abu Jahl could not accept the Qur’an or Islam. So let it be. What’s the issue? His heart does not help him.
But he does not say the hadith is fabricated. He does not claim it is a lie. He does not argue that there is a defect in its chain. He does not say the narrator is weak based on the statement of some authority or a verdict by any scholar. These would be valid scholarly critiques, open to discussion and academic review. What is wrong with that?
Instead, he says: “In summary, there remains in the heart doubt concerning the authenticity of this hadith, even though its chains are numerous.” Relying on the heart is one of their methods for rejecting certain hadiths. I will mention just one example otherwise, the discussion would become too lengthy.
When they want to reject a hadith but are unable to do so through any academic means, they sometimes resort to swearing oaths, saying things like: “By Allah, it is fabricated!” As if any proof could be stronger than that. Or they retreat to their hearts: “The heart testifies that this hadith is fabricated.”
He then cites an example for this from al-Hakim’s al-Mustadrak ala al-Sahihain Vol 3, pg. 164, Hadith # 4732:
أبو عبد الله محمد بن أحمد بن بطة الأصبهاني ثنا عبد الله بن محمد بن زكريا الأصبهاني ثنا إسماعيل بن عمرو البجلي ثنا الأجلح بن عبد الله الكندي عن حبيب بن أبي ثابت عن عاصم بن ضمرة عن علي رضي الله عنه قال أخبرني رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله ان أول من يدخل الجنة انا وفاطمة والحسن والحسين قلت يا رسول الله فمحبونا قال من ورائكم
قال في التلخيص: إسماعيل بن عمرو البجلي وشيخه وعاصم ضعفوا، والحديث منكر من القول يشهد القلب بوضعه.
With his chain to Ali b. Abi Talib (as) from Rasulullah (saw): The first to enter Paradise will be I, Fatimah, al-Hasan, and al-Husayn. I asked: O Messenger of Allah, what about our lovers?. He replied: They will follow you.
Al-Dhahabi says: Isma’il b. Amr al-Bajali, his teacher and ‘Asim weakened it, and hadith is munkar in its content; the heart testifies to its fabrication.
Subhan’Allah, what precisely in this report causes al-Dhahabi’s heart to reject it so strongly? Where is the clear inkar (oddness) within the narration that would justify such a vehement response from him? Does the love of Ahl al-Bayt truly bar one from Paradise? Does he question that the Prophet and the Pure Five are the first to enter Paradise? If not, then what in the content of this Hadith compelled him to label it as munkar?
The scholars of Ahlus Sunnah frequently prioritize their personal sentiments over objective truth. On what grounds, then, can we place trust in their claims regarding the falsehood of this Hadith? Do they present substantive evidence to invalidate the report, or is their rejection merely an extension of their doctrinal bias designed to uphold the integrity of the Sunni hadith corpus?
Tampering with the reports of Hadith al-Tayr
The third and least surprising strategy their scholars use in rejecting this Hadith is tampering with its content completely! When the scholar is not able to justify its weakness or make up a principle that involves the heart, he tampers with the report completely to hide it away from the public.
And what shall we make of this strategy? Is this shameless act a valid means of preserving your faith? Censor what does not agree with your religious ideals? Cut out the words uttered by the Holy Prophet (saw), because you cannot handle them? Because it demolishes your entire sect?
Just refer to our "Censorship article of Ahmad b. Hanbal" to witness the shamelessness of their scholars in more depth, constantly censoring reports that do not fit their ideals and narratives. Truly shameless and disingenuous acts committed without any self-accountability, and Hadith Al Tayr is one of the many reports that were not safe from these insincere tactics.
Ahmad b. Hanbal
Consider this following hadith found in Fadha'il al-Sahaba, vol. 2, pg. 560 - 563 by Ahmad b. Hanbal:
حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، نا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عُمَرَ، نا يُونُسُ بْنُ أَرْقَمَ قثنا مَطِيرُ بْنُ أَبِي خَالِدٍ، عَنْ ثَابِتٍ الْبَجَلِيِّ، عَنْ سَفِينَةَ قَالَ:
أَهْدَتِ امْرَأَةٌ مِنَ الْأَنْصَارِ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ طَيْرَيْنِ بينَ رَغِيفَيْنِ، فَقَدَّمَتْ إِلَيْهِ الطَّيْرينِ، فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «اللَّهُمَّ ائْتِنِي بِأَحَبِّ خَلْقك إِلَيكَ وَإِلَى رَسُولِكَ»
وَرَفَعَ صَوْتَهُ، فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «مَنْ هَذَا؟» فَقَالَ: عَلِيٌّ، فَقَالَ: «فَافْتَحْ لَهُ» ، فَفَتَحْتُ، فَأَكَلَ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مِنَ الطَّيْرَينِ حَتَّى فَنِيَا.
Abdullah ibn Muhammad narrated to us, Abdullah ibn Umar narrated to us, Yunus ibn Arqam narrated to us, Matir ibn Abi Khalid narrated to us, from Thabit al-Bajali, from Safinah who said:
A woman from the Ansar gifted the Messenger of Allah (saw) two birds placed between two loaves of bread. She presented the birds to him, and the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You and to Your Messenger.”
He raised his voice and said: “Who is this?” It was said: "Ali." So he said: “Then open for him.” I opened the door, and Ali ate with the Messenger of Allah (saw) from the two birds until they were finished.
Observe the wording of the Hadith and compare it with the narration of others. If we take the text as it is, we understand that the Prophet is the one who raised his voice loudly while praying or said something aloud after he prayed.
It says “He raised his voice”, who did? The report doesn’t specify or mention it. But in truth, Ahmad’s version is clearly altered, because in some versions we read that when Ali came the first time, Anas turned him away and did not allow him to enter by making excuses that the Prophet (saw) was occupied. The same happened the second time.
Then on the third attempt, when Imam Ali (as) came again, he (meaning Imam Ali) raised his voice out of frustration of Anas’ actions and created a commotion by grabbing his chest. Only then did the Prophet ask, ‘Who is that?’, responding to the noise.
The full uncensored version can be read from Tarikh Madinat Dimashq by Ibn 'Asakir, vol. 42, pg. 258 - 259:
وأخبرتنا به أم المجتبى قالت قرىء على إبراهيم أنا ابن المقرىء أنا أبو يعلى نا عبيد الله القواريري نا يونس بن أرقم نا مطير بن أبي خالد عن ثابت البجلي عن سفينة صاحب دار النبي ﷺ قال:
أهدت امرأة من الأنصار إلى رسول الله ﷺ طيرين بين رغيفين وكان رسول الله ﷺ في المسجد لم يكن في البيت غيري وغير أنس بن مالك فجاء رسول الله ﷺ فدعا بالغذاء فقلت يا رسول الله قد أهدت لك امرأة هدية فقدمت إليه الطير فقال اللهم ائتني بأحب خلقك أحسبه قال إليك وإلى رسولك قال فجاء علي فضرب الباب ضربا خفيفا فقلت من هذا قال أبو الحسن ثم ضرب ورفع صوته فقال رسول الله ﷺ من هذا قلت علي قال افتح له ففتحت فأكل مع رسول الله ﷺ من الطيرين حتى فنيا
Umm al-Mujtaba informed us, she said: It was read to Ibrahim, he said: Ibn al-Muqri’ informed us, Abu Ya‘la informed us, ʿUbaydullah al-Qawārīrī narrated to us, Yūnus b. Arqam narrated to us, Muṭīr b. Abī Khālid narrated to us, from Thābit al-Bajalī, from Safina:
A woman from the Anṣār gifted two birds to the Messenger of Allah (saw) between two loaves of bread. The Messenger of Allah (saw) was in the mosque, and no one was in the house except me and Anas b. Mālik. Then the Messenger of Allah (saw) came and called for food. I said: O Messenger of Allah, a woman has gifted you a present. So I presented the birds to him. Then he said: O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation.
Then ʿAlī came and knocked lightly on the door. I asked: Who is this? He said: Abū al-Ḥasan. Then he knocked again and raised his voice.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) asked: Who is that? I said: ʿAlī. He said: Open for him. So I opened the door, and he ate with the Messenger of Allah (saw) from the two birds until nothing remained.
First thing that we observe is that the red part was censored out, where Imam Ali (as) came to the door twice and in other narrations thrice until he raised his voice. When the Prophet (saw) heard this, he requested Ali (as) to enter to eat this bird with him.
Second thing we note is that the chain is the same one that goes back to Yunus b. ‘Arqam. Since Ahmad b. Hanbal narrates it differently and Ibn ‘Asakir’s version is corroborated with other reports, it becomes clear Ibn ‘Asakir or the narrators in between did not add to this Hadith.
It was none other than the famous unreliable transmitter of Hadiths, Shaykh al-Censorship, Ahmad b. Hanbal, who decided to omit this part. We have already chosen 8 cases of Ahmad’s censorship in this article for those wanting to see the dishonesty of this author.
In another instance we find a report in Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal Vol 20, pg. 339, Hadith # 13043:
سمعتُ أَنس بن مالك وهو يقول : أُهدِيَتْ لرسول الله ﷺ ثلاث طوائر ، فأَطْعَمَ خادمه طائراً، فلما كان من الغَدِ أَتته به، فقال لها رسول الله ﷺ : «أَلَمْ أَنْهَكِ أَنْ تَرْفَعِي شيئاً لِغَدٍ)؟ فَإِنَّ الله يَأْتِي بِرِزْقِ كُلِّ غدٍ.
I heard Anas b. Mālik say: Three small birds were gifted to the Messenger of Allah (saw), so he fed one bird to his servant. The next day, she brought it back to him. The Messenger of Allah (saw) said to her: “Did I not forbid you from saving anything for the next day? Verily, Allah brings the provision for every day.”
Now, one might initially assume that this Hadith refers to a different event, unrelated to Hadith al-Tayr. However, a close comparison of the wordings makes it clear that this is the same Hadith, transmitted through the same chain, and that it contains references to Ali (as), albeit with clear signs of tampering and censorship.
Ibn Yunus al-Masri
In another example of clear censorship, we mention Ibn Yunus al-Masri, who was the student of al-Nasa’i and al-Razi. Ibn Hajar quotes his reference in Lisan al-Mizan, Vol. 6, pg. 533:
قلت: ذكره ابن يونس في "تاريخ مصر" قال: أحمد بن عياض بن عبد الملك بن نُصَير المُفْرِضُ، مولى جَنْب من مُراد، يكنى أبا غسان، يروي عن يحيى بن حسان. توفي سنة ٢٧٣.
هكذا ذكره، ولم يذكر فيه جرحاً ثم أسند له حديثاً، فقال : حدثني المعافى بن عمر بن حفص المرادي، حدثنا أبو غسان أحمد بن عياض الجنبي، حدثنا يحيى بن حسان عن سليمان بن بلال، عن يحيى بن سعيد، عن أنس رضي الله عنه، عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : «لا يلام الرجل على حُبّ قومه». وهذا طرف من حديث الطير .
I said: Ibn Yunus mentioned in Tarikh Misr, saying:
Ahmad b. ʿIyad b. ʿAbd al-Malik b. Nusair al-Mufrid, a freedman of Janb from Murad, whose kunya was Abu Ghassan. He narrated from Yahya b. Hassan. He died in the year 273.
This is how he mentioned it, and he did not include any criticism in it. Then he attributed a hadith to him, saying:
al-Mu‘āfā b. ʿUmar b. Ḥafṣ al-Murādī narrated to me, Abū Ghassān Aḥmad b. ʿIyāḍ al-Janabī narrated to us, Yaḥyā b. Ḥassān narrated to us from Sulaymān b. Bilāl, from Yaḥyā b. Saʿīd, from Anas, from the Prophet (saw), who said:
“A man is not to be blamed for loving his people.” And this is a portion of the hadith of the bird.
As we see from the above, even Ibn Hajar had to mention the fact that this Hadith quoted by Ibn Yunus was just a smaller variant that was shamelessly cut off. We can in fact find the full variant of this report today as narrated from Yahya b. Hassan, from Sulayman b. Bilal, from Yahya b. Sa’id, from Anas in Al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim, Vol. 3, page 141-142, Hadith 4650.
This version as we read has the same chain as Ibn Yunus’, except that it has the full portion of the report, proving that censorship was indeed made by Ibn Yunus.
Khatib al-Baghdadi
The version recorded in Tarikh Baghdad, vol. 11, pg. 375 states:
علي بن الحسن بن إِبْرَاهِيم بن قُتَيْبَة بن جبلة، أبو مُحَمَّد القَطَّان: حدث عن سهل بن زنجلة الرازي. روى عنه مُحَمَّد بن مخلد. أَخْبَرَنَا أبو مُحَمَّد عبد الله بن علي بن عياض القاضي أَخْبَرَنَا مُحَمَّد بن أحمد بن جميع الغَسَّانِي، حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّد بن مخلد، حدثني أبو مُحَمَّد عَلي بن الحسن ابن إبراهيم بن قتيبة بن جبلة القَطَّان، حَدَّثَنَا سَهْل بن زنجلة، حدثنا الصباح، يعني ابن محارب عن عُمر بن عبد الله بن يعلى بن مرة عن أبيه عن جده. وعن أنس بن مالك قالا :
أهدي إلى رسول الله ﷺ طير، ما نراه إلا حبارى. فقال: «اللهم ابعث إلى أحب أصحابي إليك يواكلني هذا الطير» وذكر الحديث.
ʿAlī b. al-Ḥasan b. Ibrāhīm b. Qutaybah b. Jabalah narrated from Sahl b. Zanjalah, from al-Ṣabāḥ b. Muḥārib, from ʿUmar b. ʿAbd Allāh b. Yaʿlā b. Murrah, from his father, from his grandfather. Also from Anas b. Malik, they said:
A bird was gifted to the Messenger of Allah (saw); we did not see it to be anything but a bustard. So he said: “O Allah, send to me the most beloved of Your companions to You to eat this bird with me,” and he mentioned the rest of the hadith.
The persistent inconsistency and selective honesty of their scholars is difficult to ignore. Here we find Khatib al-Baghdadi, their respected scholar, narrating the report, yet there’s no mention of Imam Ali (as) or the continuation of the report? Instead he simply says “and he mentioned the rest”.
Had he at least shown the dignity to narrate this hadith elsewhere in his book, whether with different or multiple chains, we might have found some justification for his action. But no; he narrated it only once and deliberately chose to censor the part that identifies Imam Ali (as) as the most beloved creation of God after the Rasulullah (saw).
The blatant censorship when it comes to the Fadha’il of Imam Ali (as) exists in the Sunni corpus over and over again. It’s because this agenda of hiding Imam Ali’s (as) merits is their main strategy to protect the Sunni false narrative of Imam Ali (as) being inferior.
May Allah punish those who attempt to hide the words of Rasulullah (saw).
Abu Shaykh al-Asbhani
Abu Shaykh is another reliable scholar for Ahlus Sunnah. He’s also well praised by al-Dhahabi and others. He recorded this report from Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq (AS) from Anas b. Malik in Tabaqat al-Muhaddithin Fi Isfahan, vol. 3, pg. 453 - 454, Hadith 613 but similar to Khatib al-Baghdadi, he decided to censor the report by ending it off as “and he mentioned the report”:
حدثنا إبراهيم, قال: ثنا أحمد بن الوليد بن برد، قال: عبد الله بن ميمون، عن جعفر بن مُحمَّد، عن أبيه، عن أنس بن مالك، قال:
أَهْدِيَ لِرَسُولِ الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - طير، فقال: «اللهم إئتني بِأَحَبِّ خَلْقِكَ إِلَيْكَ يَأْكُلُ مَعِي هذا الطَّيْرَ»، فجاء عَلِي فأكل معه، فذكر الحديث
Ibrahim said: Ahmad b. al-Walid b. Bard narrated to us, from Abdullah b. Maymun, from Jaʿfar b. Muhammad, from his father, from Anas b. Malik:
A bird was presented to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), so he said: “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved of Your creation to You, to eat this bird with me.” So Ali came and ate with him. He then narrated the remainder of the hadith.
Once again, the very least a scholar should do when omitting parts of a hadith like this is to mention the full report elsewhere. Such censorship might be somewhat justifiable if done transparently, but in this case, the scholar only censors the part where Anas stopped Ali (as) from entering, in the only version of the hadith he reported.
We know this because the full version of this exact report was recorded by Ibn al-Jawzi in al-‘Ilal al-Mutanahiyah, vol. 1, pg. 235:
رَوَى أَبُو بَكْرِ بْنُ مَرْدَوَيْهِ قَالَ نا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحُسَيْنِ قَالَ حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ قَالَ نا علي بن الحسن السَّمَالِيُّ قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ الْحَسَنَ بْنَ الْجَهْمِ عَنْ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ مَيْمُونٍ عَنْ جَعْفَرِ بْنِ مُحَمَّدٍ عَنْ أَبِيهِ عَنْ أَنَسٍ قَالَ:
أُهْدِيَ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ طَائِرٌ فَأَعْجَبَهُ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ:" اللَّهُمَّ ائْتِنِي بأحب إِلَيْكَ وَإِلَيَّ يَأْكُلُ مَعِي مِنْ هَذَا الطَّيْرِ قَالَ أَنَسٌ قُلْتُ اللَّهُمَّ اجْعَلْهُ رَجُلا مِنَّا حَتَّى يُشْرَفَ بِهِ قَالَ فَإِذَا عَلِيٌّ فَلَمَّا أَنْ رَأَيْتُهُ حَسَدْتُهُ فَقُلْتُ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ مَشْغُولٌ فَرَجَعَ قَالَ فَدَعَى النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ الثَّانِيَةَ فَأَقْبَلَ عَلِيٌّ كَأَنَّمَا يَضْرِبُ بِالسِّيَاطِ فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ افْتَحْ افْتَحْ فَدَخَلَ فَسَمِعْتُهُ يَقُولُ اللَّهُمَّ وَالِ حَتَّى أَكَلَ مَعَهُ مِنْ ذَلِكَ الطَّيْرِ".
Abu Bakr ibn Mardawayh narrated: Muhammad ibn al-Husayn told us, he said: Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Abd al-Rahman narrated to us, he said: Ali ibn al-Hasan al-Samali said: Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn al-Jahm narrated to me from Abdullah ibn Maymun from Ja'far ibn Muhammad from his father from Anas who said:
A bird was gifted to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and he liked it. So the Prophet ﷺ said, “O Allah, bring to me the most beloved to You and to me who will eat this bird with me.”
Anas said: I said, “O Allah, make him a man from among us so that we may be honored by him.” Then Ali came. When I saw him, I became envious and said, “The Prophet ﷺ is busy,” so he left.
Then the Prophet ﷺ made the supplication a second time, and Ali came again, as if he had been struck with whips. The Prophet ﷺ said: “Open! Open!” and he entered. I heard him (the Prophet ﷺ) say: “O Allah, befriend him,” until he ate with him from that bird.
It is the same report that goes back to Ja’far al-Sadiq (as) through Abdullah b. Maymun, but Abu Shaykh censored it because he did not want it recorded for it drew criticism towards Anas and brought attention to the exclusive merits of Imam Ali (as).
Now, dear readers, we invite you to reflect deeply on this matter: Is it ever acceptable to distort or censor the words of Rasulullah (saw) merely because they conflict with personal sentiments? Can it be justified to alter or suppress Hadiths, as Ahlus Sunnah have been repeatedly accused of, simply because those narrations do not align with a particular sectarian ideology?
Moreover, what does it reveal when the Prophet’s (saw) authentic words contradict one’s doctrinal positions? Does this not expose fundamental flaws within that ideology itself? Should we prioritize such biased interpretations and emotional prejudices over the sacred and unalterable words of the Holy Prophet (saw)?
No matter how much the rejectors weaken the chains, they cannot erase the fact that these scholars have corrupted the words of the Messenger of Allah (saw), for which they deserve Allah’s curse.
Controversy Behind al-Hakim's Documentation of Hadith al-Tayr
And let us not assume that the distortion of hadith ends here, they will continue this pattern even with their own scholars!
Al-Dhahabi records in Siyar 'Alam al-Nubala, vol. 17, pg. 176:
قال ابن طاهر قد سمعت أبا محمد بن السمرقندي يقول: بلغني أن مستدرك الحاكم ذكر بين يدي الدارقطني فقال: نعم يستدرك عليهما حديث الطير. فبلغ ذلك الحاكم فأخرج الحديث من الكتاب
قلت: هذه حكاية منقطعة بل لم تقع فإن الحاكم إنما ألف المستدرك في أواخر عمره بعد موت الدارقطني بمدة وحديث الطير ففي الكتاب لم يُحوّل منه بل هو أيضاً في جامع الترمذي قال ابن طاهر ورأيت أنا حديث الطير جمع الحاكم بخطه في جزء ضخم فكتبته للتعجب
Ibn Tahir said: I heard Abu Muhammad al-Samarqandi say: It reached me that al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim was mentioned in the presence of al-Daraqutni, and he said: “Yes, try to correct them (Bukhari & Muslim) with hadith al-Tayr!”. So when this reached al-Hakim, he removed the hadith from the book.
I (Ibn Tahir) say: This is a disconnected story, in fact, it never even occurred for al-Hakim only authored al-Mustadrak in the latter part of his life, long after al-Daraqutni had already passed away. And as for hadith al-Tayr, it remains in the book and was not removed from it; it is also found in Jami al-Tirmidhi.
Ibn Tahir said: And I myself saw hadith al-Tayr compiled in a large volume by al-Hakim in his own handwriting, so I copied it out in amazement.
Sunni scholars have even resorted to fabricating claims about their own scholars to support the false narrative that this Hadith is invalid, but not out of genuine doubt about its sources. Rather, it is purely because of their fundamental disagreement with Rasulullah (saw) himself! They went so far as to fabricate a claim against al-Hakim, alleging that he removed the Hadith from his Mustadrak simply because they could not tolerate its inclusion. However, this story is entirely false and implausible, as al-Dhahabi himself confirms.
And yet, this still isn’t the lowest they’ll go. Consider the following remarks by Imam al-Subki in Tabaqat al-Shafi’iyat al-Kubra, vol. 2, pg. 452, which reflect the deep discomfort this hadith provoked even among their leading scholars:
وحكى شيخنا الذهبى أن الحاكم سئل عن حديث الطير ، فقال : لا يصح، ولو صحلما كان أحد أفضل من على بعد رسول الله ﷺ.
ثم قال شيخنا وهذه الحكاية سندها صحيح، فما باله أخرج حديث الطير في المستدرك. ثم قال: فلعله تغير رأيه.
قلت: وكلام شيخنا حق، وإدخاله حديث الطير في المستدرك، مستدرك، وقـد جوزت أن يكون زيد فى كتابه، وألا يكون هو أخرجه، وبحثت عن نسخ قديمة من المستدرك فلم أجد ما ينشر الصدر لعدمه، وتذكرت قول الدارقطني : إنه يستدرك حديث الطير، فغلب على ظني أنه لم يوضع عليه.
ثم تأملت قول من قال : إنه أخرجه من الكتاب، فجوزت أن يكون خرجه، ثم أخرجه من الكتاب، وبقى في بعض النسخ، فإن ثبت هذا صحت الحكايات، ويكون خرجه في الكتاب قبل أن يظهر له بطلانه، ثم أخرجه منه لاعتقاده عدم صحته، كما في هذه الحكاية التى صحح الذهبى سندها ، ولكنه في بعض النسخ، إما لانتشار النسخ بالكتاب، أو لإدخال بعض الطاعنين إياه فيه، فكل هذا جائز، والعلم عند الله تعالى.
Our shaykh al-Dhahabi reported that al-Hakim was asked about the hadith of the bird, and he replied, “It is not authentic, and even if it were, then none would be superior to ʿAli after the Messenger of Allah (saw).”
Then our shaykh (al-Dhahabi) said, “This report has a sound chain so why, then, did al-Hakim include Hadith al-Tayr in al-Mustadrak?” He then said, “Perhaps his opinion changed.” I say: what our shaykh has said is correct, and the inclusion of Hadith al-Tayr in the Mustadrak is itself something to be critically examined.
I had considered that perhaps it was added to his book and that he himself was not the one who originally included it. I searched through old manuscripts of the Mustadrak, but I did not find anything that would satisfy the heart due to their absence. I then remembered the statement of al-Daraqutni that it is among the ḥadīths subject to critique so it is likely that it was not falsely attributed to al-Hakim.
Then I considered the view of those who claimed that he removed it from the book, and I deemed it possible that he first included it, then later removed it, and it remained in some copies. If this is established, then the reports are reconciled, and it would mean he included it in the book before its falsehood became apparent to him, and then he removed it due to his belief in its inauthenticity, as is indicated by this report whose chain al-Dhahabi authenticated. Yet it remained in some copies, either due to the widespread transmission of the book’s manuscripts or due to someone inserting it out of bias.
All of this is possible, and knowledge is with Allah the Exalted.
Subhan’Allah, we should take a moment to admire the absolute lengths these scholars will go to make up things and fabricate lies about their own scholars just to reject a Hadith narrating the fadhila of Ali (as)!
Here, al-Subki could not accept that Hadith al-Tayr remained in al-Mustadrak of al-Hakim, so he devised a theory, suggesting that it was either a later addition by outsiders or that al-Hakim himself had intended to remove it. Yet all the manuscripts he revised contradicted this and showed that al-Hakim did indeed narrate it and never removed it.
Yet still al-Subki clings to his delusions and says, “All of this is possible” as his heart cannot accept this.
We also want you to take a look at how they talk about al-Hakim simply for authenticating Hadith al-Tayr in ‘Ilal al-Mutanahiyah, vol. 1, pg. 234:
وَقَالَ ابْنُ طَاهِرٍ حَدِيثُ الطَّائِرِ مَوْضُوعٌ إِنَّمَا يَجِيءُ مِنْ سُقَّاطِ أَهْلِ الْكُوفَةِ عَنِ الْمَشَاهِيرِ وَالْمَجَاهِيلِ عَنْ أَنَسٍ وَغَيْرِهِ قَالَ ولا يخلوا أَمْرُ الْحَاكِمِ مِنْ أَمْرَيْنِ إِمَّا الْجَهْلُ بِالصَّحِيحِ فَلا يُعْتَمَدُ عَلَى قَوْلِهِ وَأَمَّا الْعِلْمُ بِهِ وَيقولُ بِهِ فَيَكُونُ مُعَانِدًا كَذَّابًا دَسَّاسًا.
Ibn Tahir said: The hadith of the bird is fabricated; it only comes through the rejects of Kufah’s narrators, from the well-known and the unknown, from Anas and others. He said: The matter of al-Hakim does not escape one of two possibilities: either he was ignorant of what is authentic, in which case his judgment is not to be relied upon, or he knew it and still endorsed it, in which case he is a stubborn liar and a forger who inserts (falsehoods).
Allahu Akbar. Just when we thought these scholars can’t sink any lower… they do. This scholar is now accusing that Al-Hakim is either a jahil (ignorant) or a kadhab (liar) for authenticating Hadith al-Tayr. No other justification.
Is this the kind of scholarly discourse Sunni scholars have among themselves? Where, exactly, is al-Hakim’s ignorance in authenticating Hadith al-Tayr, given that many of its narrators are reliable? Unlike others, he chose not to weaken them merely for transmitting the report.
Is al-Hakim a jahil for not appealing to his heart as a criterion for rejecting Hadith al-Tayr? Or is he a kadhab for refusing to weaken narrators for merely narrating this incident? We will leave our readers to judge.
Finally, after every illogical route has been exhausted, from scrutinising the chains and debating the meanings, but failing in every turn to refute Hadith al-Tayr, these people resort to their final method.
This is their last tactic in coping for this Hadith and overcoming their fear of its wide transmission and content...
Beaten for Narrating Hadith al-Tayr
And what shall we call this method? Frankly, we do not know. Let us simply cite the example and then you may name it however you wish.
Let’s recount the case of Ibn al-Saqqa al-Wasiti (d. 373 AH). His story is a telling example of the desperation that follows when solid academic criticism fails and those driven by sectarian motives abandon scholarly discourse altogether.
قال السلفي : سألت خميساً الحوزي عن ابن السقاء، فقال: هو من مزينة مضر، ولم يكن سقاءً، بل هو لقب له، كان من وجوه الواسطيين وذوي الثروة والحفظ، رحل به أبوه، وأسمعه من أبي خليفة، وأبي يعلى، وابن زيدان البجلي، والمفضل الجندي وجماعة، وبارك الله في سنه وعلمه، واتفق أنه أملى حديث الطائر، فلم تحتمله أنفسهم فوثبوا به، وأقاموه، وغسلوا موضعه، فمضى ولزم بيته لا يُحدِّث أحداً من الواسطيين، ولهذا قل حديثه عندهم. قال: وتوفي سنة إحدى وسبعين، حدثني بذلك كله شيخنا أبو الحسن المغازلي
I asked al-Ḥāfiẓ Khumays al-Jawzī about Ibn al-Saqqā, and he said: He was from Muzaynah of Muḍar, and "al-Saqqā" was only a nickname, not a profession. He was one of the notables of Wāsiṭ, wealthy and knowledgeable, with excellent memory. His father took him on travels to hear hadith from Abū Khalīfah, Abū Yaʿlā, and others, and Allah blessed his age and knowledge.
It so happened that he once dictated Hadīth al-Ṭayr, but their hearts could not bear it. So they attacked him, forced him out of his seat, and washed the place where he had been sitting. After that, he returned to his home and never narrated again to the people of Wāsiṭ. For this reason, few of his hadith are found in their records.
This may be the single most appalling example that exposes just how much power and fear this one single Hadith holds over the entire Sunni population and their core beliefs.
What’s even more shocking is that these people washed the spot where he was sat while narrating the words of Rasulullah (saw), since to them that place became impure just because he had dictated the chains of Hadith al-Tayr on it.
It’s astonishing what Nasb (hatred) towards Imam Ali (as) can lead these people to do, such that they felt the need to purify the seat where the words of the Prophet were spoken from. What exactly is it in the matn (content) of this Hadith that haunts the Sunnis like this?
Is it justified to treat a man like such when he wasn’t just quoting a mere baseless Hadith that came out of nowhere, rather he was reading this from the established books of Sunni Ahadith?
Even al-Dhahabi, when commenting on this narration, admits that at the very least, it can be said that this Hadith has a origin (asl), in his Tadhkirat al-Huffaz, vol. 3, pg. 162 - 164:
وأما حديث الطير فله طرق كثيرة جداً قد أفردتها بصفة, ومجموعها هو يوجب أن يكون الحديث له أصل
As for the Hadith of the Bird, it has a great many chains which I have documented separately, and their collective weight indicates that the hadith has an origin/basis (asl).
This means that the Hadith has a traceable source, and is not some random fabricated made-up tale pulled from thin air. Ibn al-Saqqa was simply relating what he heard from reliable transmitters and read in the books of credible Hadith authors.
So why was he treated as impure? Why were those who narrated it not accused of najasa? Why was it so sinful for him to relay this report that they decided to violently assault him?
Had this Hadith been about any other companion besides Imam Ali (as), they certainly would not have dared to accuse Ibn al-Saqqa of being impure nor acted violently with him.
There is no reason not to doubt the vague wording of this report, which merely states that he was simply “attacked.” It very likely omits the full details of the stabbings, the brutal beating, and perhaps even his death resulting from the incident. This is unsurprising, given that similar omissions have occurred with other scholars, and it is not unexpected for someone like al-Dhahabi to censor such details.
In the next article, we will cover the implication and meaning of Hadith al-Tayr, and the third we will cover and examine its chains of transmissions to prove its tawatur nature, Insha'Allah.
« Next Part: Hadith al-Tayr Part II: What This Hadith Really Proves »