Below is the general criticism of Tijani, his books and his methodology:

Identifying Tijani, his Books and his Methodology


Tijani claims to have graduated from Zaytūnah college in Tunisia and that he was a Sufi belonging to Tijani order. He moved to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and became a strict Wahhābi. He then returned to Tunisia to spread Wahhabi ideology and criticize Sufism. Then he traveled to Beirūt and met a Shī`ah man called Mun`im on the boat and became influenced by him. Then he traveled to `Iraq where he became a Twelver Shī`ah after a long sincere search for truth which he claims to have found at the end of the road.

We wish the man was honest in his claims for if he was we would have placed our hand with his. Unfortunately, he has filled his books with lies, deception, backbiting and slander as you shall soon see in the coming pages.

He made his main focus in all four of his books on attacking the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the truth is that the Shī`ah do not possess anything other than this when debating the people of Sunnah.

Little do they know that this isn’t a valid argument, since the people of Sunnah do not claim the infallibility of the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) Companions as individuals. Rather, we believe that they commit mistakes, but we still honor them and look at their errors without any bias while remembering the plentiful good-deeds they have as opposed to their few faults.

The criticism of the Shī`ah towards the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) can be divided into four categories:

1- Lies attributed to them which they are completely innocent of.

2- Matters of diligent, individual reasoning.

3- Minor errors that have been blown out of proportion by adding much lies to them.

4- Mistakes committed by them but are covered by oceans of good actions.

Simply put, if Tijani was truthful in his search for truth then he should not have resorted to lies. A just man will not lie; a fraud will not speak truth, and our aid we seek from Allāh.

A General Criticism of Tijani and his Methodology in his Four Books [1]

Written by Uthmān Khamīs based off the work of Dr. Ibrahīm al-Rahīlī

Translated by Hanī Salḥab al-Ṭarābulslī

Before diving into the refutation of the main topics raised by Tijani in his four books, I need to stop to highlight the man’s condition and his ways in authoring these books as well as his truthfulness, reliability and the extent of his knowledge so that the reader may be well acquainted with this before reading the refutation.

We do so by revealing his ignorance, his ego, his lies, his deception, his contradictions, his reliance on guesswork in judgment, his failure to verify information, his faulty way of authoring and his opposition to his own method of compiling in addition to his disagreement with popular Shī`ah beliefs.

This shall all be established by referring to his words, comparing them and observing the issues he tackles within his four books.

I – Tijani’s Ignorance

This is proven by the author’s own words and his admittance that he had no personal library except after the `Iraqi Shī`ah gifted him a collection of their books, he says: “To my surprise, as I entered my home I found that many books had arrived to the house before me. I knew where they came from… I was extremely grateful for those books which I then organized and kept in a special place, which I called the library.”[2]

Then he says: “I travelled to the capital, where I bought “Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī”, “Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim”, “Musnad Ahmad”, “Ṣaḥīḥ al-Tirmidhī”, “Muwatta’ Mālik” and other popular books. I couldn’t wait to get back home and read those books and so all throughout my trip between Tunis and Gafsah I sat in the bus browsing the pages of al-Bukhārī’s book searching for the incident of ‘The Calamity of Thursday’ and hoping that I would never find it. Nevertheless, I found it…”[3]

Observe his words “I organized and kept in a special place, which I called the library” as if he’s the first man to innovate what is known as “the library” in his home. He gave it that name as if no one preceded him to this then bought the Ṣaḥīḥayn[4] and the rest of the popular books which shows that he never owned them or knew of them.

We know that these major books are found in the personal libraries of the youngest students of knowledge let alone a man who identifies himself as a scholar and an academic researcher who dives into the most dangerous topics and beliefs.

We add, that the author himself admitted in that same book that he had no knowledge of religious laws, claiming – out of ignorance – that he doesn’t require such knowledge while researching the condition of the Companions.

He quotes his discussion with a Sunni scholar: “He said: ‘You cannot interpret Islamic texts unless you’re familiar with seventeen disciplines, such as: Tafsīr [commentary on the Holy Qur’an], Linguistics, Grammar, Ṣarf [Morphology], Rhetoric, ḥadīths [Prophetic-traditions], History and others.’ I interjected by saying: ‘My independent interpretation [Ijtihad] is not for the sake of showing people the rulings of the Qur’an, the Prophet’s tradition or to be a religious leader of a new sect. No! All that I want to know is who was right and who was wrong. For example, to know whether Imam `Alī was right or Mu`āwiyah, I do not need to master the seventeen disciplines. All I had to do is to study the biography of each of them to ascertain the truth.”[5]

I say: This is why the author fell into mistakes and blunders that are apparent to the smallest students of knowledge.

Such as when he said in his book: “If you ask them: Who are these hypocrites with regards to whom more than a hundred and fifty verses were revealed in chapters 9 and 63? They respond: ‘They are `Abdullāh bin Ubayy and `Abdullāh bin Salūl.’ They can’t find others besides these two people.”[6]

He also says: “How can the hypocrisy be restricted to Ibn Ubayy and Ibn Salūl, those two who were known to all the Muslims?”[7]

As you can see, he committed grave mistakes:

Firstly, he said there are more than a hundred and fifty verses were revealed concerning the hypocrites in Surat-ul-Tawbah and Surat-ul-Munafiqun. The reader must know that both of these Qur’anic chapters combined do not constitute a hundred and fifty verses. Al-Tawbah is a hundred twenty nine while al-Munafiqun is eleven verses long. Furthermore, the verses of the two chapters are not discussing the hypocrites in their entirety, the last three from al-Munafiqun are not about the hypocrites and al-Tawbah has many verses unrelated to the hypocrites.

What is understood from his words here is that the verses of the hypocrites are restricted to these two chapters which is false. Many verses were revealed about the hypocrites outside of these chapters, such as in al-Baqarah, Aal-`Imrān, al-Nisā’, al-Mā’idah[8] and others.

Secondly, he thought that Ibn Ubayy is other than Ibn Salūl whereas they are one and the same man whose full name is `Abdullāh bin Ubayy ibn Salūl, head of the hypocrites in Madīnah.[9]

Thirdly, he said that “we will not find a third name after these two.” This is from his ignorance and his audacity to speak without knowledge. For if this risk taker went back to the most popular Sunni book of prophetic-history (Sirat ibn Hishām), he would find that in the second volume, the author had written a long list of names of hypocrites in more than ten pages. After listing them by their names and their fathers’ names, he would write what was revealed regarding each man from Qur’anic verses[10]. This is in addition to what other historians and Qur’anic commentators wrote.

From the biggest displays of ignorance shown by this man is his saying: “I’ve exchanged those Companions who turned back on their heels, like Mu`āwiyah, `Amr ibn al-`Ās, al-Mughīra ibn Shu`bah, Abū Hurayrah, `Ikrimah, Ka`b al-Ahbar and others, for the grateful Companions”[11] Although this statement has much fault and misguidance yet it contains a humungous mistake. He has counted Ka`b-ul-Aḥbār as a Companion although he is from the Followers, he embraced Islam after the death of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and only came to Madīnah during `Umar’s reign[12] as is popularly known among the scholars. The author however still fell in this big error.

In brief, the author’s mistakes reflect his ignorance but I wished to present some examples before I offer a detailed response and you shall witness more during the refutation God-willing.

II – Tijani’s Ego and Vanity

The personality of Tijani emitted strong signs of vanity and narcissism which can be seen by the way he describes himself and constantly praises himself in his books.

When he discussed his trip of pilgrimage, he wrote: “I felt that Allāh Himself called on me and cared for me by bringing me to the place that people would die while hoping to visit.”[13]

He says: “Another Godly-Care I received, it made all those who see me during the conferences like me, and many asked for my address in order to write to me.”[14]

He described his condition in his country: “My popularity exceeded my hometown to other neighboring towns; the visitors who might attend the Friday prayer and listen to the lessons go back to their communities and talk about them.”[15]

He says: “They informed me that the leader of this age, Shaykh Ismā`īl himself chose me from among all people to be in his closest private circle of followers. I was overjoyed when I heard the news. In fact I cried due to the divine care which had elevated me up to the highest and greatest of positions.”[16]

These are samples from the words of the author when describing himself and it is sufficient to disparage him and illustrate the weakness of his knowledge and mind as Allāh says:

{So do not claim yourselves to be pure; He is most knowing of who fears Him.} [53:32]

{Have you not seen those who claim themselves to be pure? Rather, Allāh purifies whom He wills, and injustice is not done to them, [even] as much as a thread [inside a date seed].} [4:49]

III – His Lies and Deception

There are plenty of examples from the author’s lies, his deception and forgeries. We present some of it:

He wrote in his book: “As we’ve presented previously, those who call themselves Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah are those who accept the leadership of the four rightly guided Caliphs: Abū Bakr, `Umar, `Uthmān and `Ali. This is commonly known by the people today. However, the unfortunate truth is that `Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib was not always counted among those rightly-guided Caliphs according to Ahlul-Sunnah nor was the legitimacy of his leadership accepted. `Alī was added to the other three at a much later time in the year 230 Hijri in Ahmad bin Ḥanbal’s time. As for the non-Shī`ah Companions, Caliphs, kings and chiefs who ruled from Abū Bakr’s time until the `Abbāsi caliph al-Mu`tasim’s time, they did not recognize `Alī’s Caliphate, rather some of them cursed him and deemed him outside the folds of Islam. Why then did you think they allowed him to be abused on the pulpits?”[17]

He also says: “For all of this we said that Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah did not accept `Alī’s caliphate except after Ahmad bin Ḥanbal in a long time. It is true that Ahmad was the first to utter this but he could not convince his contemporaries from Ahlul-ḥadīth who emulated `Abdullāh ibn `Umar.”[18]

He claimed above that Ahlul-Sunnah did not acknowledge `Alī as caliph except after Ahmad bin Ḥanbal by a long time. He also claimed that the Companions followed this opinion and some believed in `Alī’s apostasy. This is a great slander and a shameful lie as `Alī’s love and the legitimacy of his caliphate as the fourth caliph is a matter of agreement among the people of Sunnah throughout the ages and lands. In fact this matter is mass transmitted (Mutawātir) among the scholars and laypeople of Sunnis that it became a necessity that is undisputed except by ignorant men and compulsive liars.

This is why Tijani’s own claims are the strongest evidence of his deep deception.

Another example of his lies is what he said in his book: “From the narrations that pushed me to emulate Imam `Alī are those that have been narrated in the Ṣaḥīḥs of Ahlul-Sunnah and whose authenticity was confirmed in those books. Shī`ah have many more narrations but as usual I shall not argue except with what’s been agreed upon by both sects.”[19]

Then he listed some narrations such as:

  • “I am the city of knowledge and `Alī is its gate.”
  • “This is my brother, the executor of my will, and my successor after me, so listen to him and obey.”
  • “Whoever is pleased to live and die as I have, then dwell in the garden of Eden which was planted by my Lord then let me befriend `Alī after me and befriend his friends.”[20]

This is a lie as the Ṣaḥīḥ Sunni books do not contain any of these reports, nor did they deem them authentic, rather they counted them among what was fabricated as we will later show but this is just an example of his lies.

Another lie is his claim that soldiers in al-Madīnah attacked the pilgrims and beat them up: “I visited al-Baqi` Cemetery once, and while I was supplicating for mercy upon the souls of Ahlul-Bayt, I noticed an old man crying near me and I realized he was a Shī`ah. He positioned himself towards the Ka`bah and started to pray when suddenly a soldier dashed towards him, it was as if he had been observing him from before. The soldier kicked him while he was in prostration and the man lost consciousness as he was flipped on his backside. The soldier started beating him and shouting foul language. I felt bad for the elder and thought he might have been killed and so I screamed at the soldier: ‘You can’t do this! Why did you beat him while he was praying?’ He rebuked me saying: ‘Silence! Do not involve yourself or else I will beat you too!’”[21]

Anyone who has visited the holy sites for the purposes of Ḥajj, `Umrah, or business knows that this is a lie. The visitors are by the millions and they all bear witness to the safety and security provided by the Saudi Sunni state and what it provides from various services and modern facilities to serve the need for the visitors. Pilgrimage trips have become more of a promenade or a touristic trip due to the human workforce tasked with facilitating this mission and with creating a feeling of comfort for all thanks to Allāh then to that government.

IV – Tijani’s Contradictions

The author often contradicts himself in his words and his judgment. Every time he establishes a matter he goes later and demolishes it in another location until this became a reoccurring phenomenon in his books. This is not shocking as it is the habit of most followers of desires and innovators since they build their faith based on the opinions of men.

Allāh says: {If it had been from other than Allāh, you would have surely found in it many discrepancies.} [4:82]

From amongst the contradictions:

1- He said in his book: “As we have indicated above, ‘Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah’ were not identified by this name except during the second hijri century. That was their reaction to the Shī`ah who followed the path of Ahlul-Bayt. We find nothing in Sunni Fiqh and in all their beliefs they go back to the Prophet’s Sunnah as narrated by Ahlul-Bayt.”[22]

In the same book he contradicts himself: “If we desire to expand on this topic, we could say that ‘Ahlul-Sunnah wal Jama`a’ were the ones led by Umayyad and Abbāsid rulers to fight the prophetic-household. Should you go through their beliefs and books of ḥadīth, you will find no trace whatsoever of the jurisprudence of Ahlul-Bayt.”[23]

In the first text he claims that all the beliefs of the people of Sunnah and their jurisprudence are taken from the household. Whereas, in the second text he completely contradicts this by saying the people of Sunnah took all their beliefs and jurisprudence from the enemies of the household. There is no trace of the knowledge of the household in their books.

2- He said: “As for the non-Shī`ah Companions, Caliphs, kings and chiefs who ruled from Abū Bakr’s time until the `Abbāsi caliph al-Mu`tasim’s time, they did not recognize `Alī’s Caliphate, rather some of them cursed him and deemed him outside the folds of Islam.”

And he also said: “For all of this we said that Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah did not accept `Alī’s caliphate except after a long time from Ahmad bin Ḥanbal.”

He also mentioned similar texts.[24]

Then he contradicts this by saying: “As for `Alī’s Caliphate, it came to be through a pledge of allegiance from the Muhajirun and Ansar without any compulsion. They wrote about his ascension to authority to the distant lands, so they all adhered except Mu`āwiyah.”[25]

And he writes: “Won’t somebody ask Ibn `Umar, and those who followed him from Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah, when was there a cons[26]ensus on a Caliph in history similar to the consensus on the Chief of the Believers `Alī bin abī Ṭālib?”

And he said about Ibn `Umar: “We see him refraining from pledging allegiance to `Alī even though the Muslims agreed upon him.”[27]

We don’t know which of this man’s opinions to take, his claim that the people of Sunnah did not recognize `Alī’s caliphate until the time of Ibn Ḥanbal!? Or his opinion that they all agreed on his Caliphate and adhered to it from the first day without compulsion!?

3- He said: “History has recorded many facts telling us that `Alī was the most knowledgeable man among all the Companions and they used to consult him on every important matter, and we do not know of any event in which he declined to give his advice. Abū Bakr said: ‘May Allāh never test me with a problem that Abū al-Ḥasan cannot solve.’ While `Umar said: ‘If it weren’t for `Ali, `Umar would’ve perished.’”[28]

Then compare it to this: “They isolated `Alī bin Abī Ṭālib, abandoning and leaving him a prisoner in his house, not involving him in anything pertaining to their affairs for a quarter of a century, in order to defame and belittle him and to further alienate the people from him… `Alī remained in this situation, confined in his house during the Caliphate of Abū Bakr, `Umar, and `Uthmān. Everyone worked to denigrate him, to extinguish his light, and to conceal his merits and virtues.”[29]

4- He said: “Quraysh, immediately broke out in rebellion after the passing of Muḥammad. They tried to put an end to his progeny. They surrounded Fātimah’s house and placed fire wood. If `Alī had not sought a peaceful resolution with them, and had he not sacrificed his right to succession he would have surely decimated them, and Islam would have come to an end on that day.”[30]

This statement was completely contradicted by an answer he gave to a question which he claims to have received: Did Imam `Alī accept that reality and give allegiance to those folks? He answered: “Never. Imam `Alī was not happy with that condition and he never kept quiet. Rather, he argued with them and refused to give his pledge in spite of threats and warnings… `Alī never stayed quiet throughout his life and whenever he encountered a chance he would speak of his oppression and the usurpation of his rights. Sufficient evidence for this can be found in his well-known sermon al-Shaqshaqiyyah.”[31]

5- Another contradiction is this statement: “The Muslims have agreed without exception: To love the household peace be upon them and they differed concerning the others.”[32]

It conflicts with what he said when discussing the household: “For this reason you won’t find any presence for the household when it comes to Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah, nor will you find in their list of leaders and Caliphs whom they follow anyone from the Imams of the household peace be upon them.”[33]

6- He wrote: “Upon becoming Caliph, `Alī quickly moved to bring people back to the Sunnah of the Prophet, starting with the distribution of the wealth in the state’s treasury”[34]

And he wrote: “`Alī’s efforts to bring people back to the prophetic-tradition was enough of a reason for the Companions to rebel against him because they liked `Umar’s innovations.”[35]

And he wrote: “Chief of believers `Alī did not force the people to pledge allegiance through compulsion like the Caliphs before him but he abided by the laws of the Qur’an and Sunnah without changing them.”[36]

All the above conflicts with other statements he made, such as: “`Alī ibn abī Ṭālib was the only ‘opposition’. He tried during his reign to bring the people back to the prophetic-Sunnah through his words, his actions and rulings. Yet it was all in vain because they distracted him with crushing wars…”[37]

And: “These are their books and their Ṣaḥīḥs bearing testimony to what we said, that he [`Ali] had tried with all of his might to revive the prophetic-Sunnah and return the people to its embrace but ‘There’s no weight for the opinion of anyone who is not obeyed’ as he himself had said.”[38]

And: “He spent the years of his Caliphate in bloody wars imposed on him by the breakers of the oath, the iniquitous and the renegades, ending with his martyrdom. All while (`Alī was) feeling pity for the nation of Muḥammad (peace be upon him).”[39]

These are examples of what his books contain of contradictions and conflicts and if you wish to discuss this at lengths then we can mention a lot of these since his books are filled with them. I find the above to be sufficient in proving our view and so we may not prolong this any further. It has been made apparent that the man is shaky, self-contradicting and afflicted with doubts thus it isn’t sound to rely on his quotations and judgment.

V –  Tijani Follows his Desires and Relies on Conjecture While Issuing Verdicts

Tijani does not follow valid criteria to formulate his opinions. Valid criteria such as citing textual evidence and returning to the words of the people of knowledge are key elements in any research. However, he has his own odd method, where he establishes matters simply based on desire and guesswork. This method of his, stretches all the way to cover prophetic-reports and historical texts that he accepts or rejects solely through conjecture and desires, without justification. We mention some samples from his books:

He said in his book Ask Those who Know: “Those who ruled the Muslims during the Umayyad dynasty, whose chief was Mu`āwiyah bin abī Sufiyān, did not believe any day that Muḥammad bin `Abdillāh (peace be upon him) was sent with a Godly message or that he was truly God’s Messenger. They most probably believed that he was a magician”[40]

This is a dangerous judgment concerning the rulers of the Muslims who succeeded the rightly-guided Caliphs. These men reigned during most of the lives of the best Muslim generation (Companions) and a third of the lives of the second best generation. During their rule, we witnessed conquests and glory for Islam and Muslims. We saw support for the Muslims and the upholding of religious tradition, all proving their sincere faith. The stories of these rulers’ justice, piety and uprightness, throughout the ages, have reached us in mass transmission. Especially, the respected Companion, Mu`āwiyah bin Abī Sufiyan and the great follower `Umar bin `Abdul-`Azīz, May Allāh be pleased with both. Yet, this man pops-up in our modern times to make such a despicable accusation, announcing that these rulers never believed in prophet-hood without any evidence. He wasn’t satisfied with this; he then went and followed it with another opinion, relying solely on guesswork as he admitted: “They most probably believed that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was a magician.” This is how he produces his judgments on the best of this nation, may Allāh treat him as he deserves.

Similarly, he says: “Most likely, those believing in the principle of consultation in deciding the identity of a Caliph are the same ones who altered the revelation of the verse from its reality on the day of Ghadīr Khum.”[41]

He also said about `Abdul-Rahmān bin `Awf: “Most probably, he placed a condition upon the chief of believers `Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib to rule among them with Allāh’s book and the example of the two Shaykhs,[42] so `Alī refused this offer”[43]

He also said: “This is why I personally believe that some of the Companions attributed the prohibition of Mut`ah to the Prophet, in order to justify and strengthen `Umar’s stance.”[44]

Besides these baseless attacks and false accusations towards the Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the best of our predecessors from among the scholars and the leaders. You find him, praising the Twelver Shī`ah and glorifying their faith.

He says while discussing his visit to `Iraq, where he saw the Twelvers circulating around the graves and rubbing against them: “I was looking at the elders wearing black or white turbans on their heads and the signs of prostration on their foreheads, with their long perfumed beards, adding to their dignity alongside their sharp stares. As soon as one of them entered the shrine, he started crying, and I began questioning myself: Is it possible that all these tears are fake? Is it possible that all these old people are wrong?”[45]

And in another location: “In fact I liked the way they worshipped, I liked their prayers, their manners, and the respect they gave to their learned people, and wished that I could be one of them.”[46]

As for his technique in criticizing narrations, he has developed an equally odd and unprecedented way, even from among those who adhere to the verdicts of their intellect and submit the narrations to the intellect, before accepting or rejecting, have not preceded him to this. You find him playing with the narrations according to his desires. He authenticates, weakens, omits parts and adds others. In fact he would accept a part of a narration and weakens another part of that same exact narration. All of this based on desires and conjecture without due justification.

For example, he quoted the narration of Muslim from Ibn `Umar: The Prophet (peace be upon him) came out of `Ā’ishah’s house and said: “The head of disbelief is from here, from where the horn of the devil shall emerge, meaning the east.”[47]

He quoted the above but crossed the last part “meaning from the east” then said: “No need to pay attention to the addition they included: “Meaning the east”. This is a clear fabrication to shield the mother of the believers and to repel any accusation away from her.”[48] So why did they bother narrating it then!?

From the narrations he criticized, is the Ṣaḥīḥ narration of `Ā’ishah from al-Bukhārī: “We made pilgrimage with the Prophet (peace be upon him) and went forth in multitudes on the day of sacrifice. Safiyyah started menstruation but the Prophet desired what other men desired from their wives. I said: ‘O Messenger of Allāh (peace be upon him), she has her period.’”[49]

Tijani commented: “How astonishing is this Prophet who wishes to have intercourse with his wife in the presence and knowledge of his other wife who informs him that she is menstruating, while the one with who is intended knows nothing.”[50]

VI – Tijani’s Nonconformity towards the Foundations of Authorship

Tijani did not adhere to the popular academic method recognized by researchers and authors. He doesn’t follow them in the way he presents issues, in organizing topics or referencing information from its adequate sources. I add, he did not abide by the correct standard of scientific research, which is founded on evidence; rather his books are devoid of all this.

As for his method in presenting topics, he didn’t follow a clear way in presenting them, such as dividing topics of discussion under different chapters with sub-chapters and sections as modern academics do.[51] Nor did he follow the way of the early scholars who present their topics under different independent sections, with accuracy in presentation and organization. The author’s decision was to place different titles, in a non-chronological way, disconnected from what is before or after them. He also fell into repetition when it comes to the titles when discussing the same topic and in the same book. This turns his book into a collection of newspaper articles combined in an unrefined and disorganized manner.

We present an example of how disconnected and disorganized his topics were in the book “To be with the Truthful”. He spoke about the matter of consultation under the title (A Comment on the Consultation). This title gives the impression that this topic had been discussed before but this time he wished to follow up with some comments. In reality, this wasn’t the case, for that title came right after another one under the title of (Other Evidences for `Alī’s Authority). Then he jumps quickly after the matter of consultation and places another title (Disagreement on the Two Weighty Things).

After one topic from this, he places yet a new title (Differences among Sunni Sects Concerning the Prophetic-Sunnah). Then he swiftly moves to another topic after it (Fate and Destiny According to Ahlul-Sunnah). Two topics later, he discusses Khums[52] and Taqleed[53]. [54]

Just as you’ve seen, the man does not follow a scientific or academic approach in his research. He simply places random topic titles and discusses each of them in three to four pages in a non-academic fashion before he moves to something else.

To further illustrate this, I will copy a list of topic titles he placed in his book “The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah” that appear in the following order even though there’s no relation between them:

  • Emulating and Islamic Authorities for Ahlul-Sunnah
  • The Rightly-Guided Caliphs according to Shī`ah
  • The Rightly-Guided Caliphs according to Ahlul-Sunnah
  • The Prophet (peace be upon him) rejects the Legislation of Ahlul-Sunnah
  • A Necessary Post Script
  • Enmity of Ahlul-Sunnah Towards Ahlul-Bayt Reveals their Identity

All the above are discussed in thirteen pages only without anything linking them together.[55]

Another example is the following titles which he places in this order:

  • The Decisive Speech in Judging the Companions
  • The Opposition of Ahlul-Sunnah to the prophetic-Sunan
  • The System of Judgment in Islam
  • The Justice of the Companions Contradicts the Explicit Sunnah[56]

With this great confusion when it comes to putting forth various topics, we wished that the author would discuss the topic at hand under the title he had placed. On the contrary, we see him discussing the same exact topic in different locations of his books in a boring and repetitive way that serves no purpose except fill pages with ink.

For example, his discussion of the position of Ahlul-Sunnah vis-a-vis the prophetic-Sunnah and his claim that they oppose it has been discussed by him more than once in his book “The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah”.

The first time, pg.29 under title (Their Disagreement with the Sunnah)

The second time, pg.45 under title (Ahlul-Sunnah don’t know the Prophetic-Sunnah)

The third time, pg.52 under title (Ahlul-Sunnah Annul the Sunnah)

The fourth time, pg.287 under title (Ahlul-Sunnah’s Opposition to the Prophetic-Sunan)

The fifth time, pg.295 under title (The Prophet (peace be upon him) orders Muslims to Emulate his Progeny and Ahlul-Sunnah Oppose him)

Or the matter of defining the identity of Ahlul-Sunnah, he discussed it in locations of his book “The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah”:

The first time, pg.75 under title (Introducing the Leaders of Ahlul-Sunnah)

The second time, pg.170 under title (Leaders of Ahlul-Sunnah and their Pivots)

Also the matter of the position of the people of Sunnah from sending peace upon the Prophet (peace be upon him), he discussed it in two distant locations of the same book:

The first time, pg.164 under title (Ahlul-Sunnah Corrupting the Way Salutations are sent upon Muḥammad and his Family)

The second time, pg.303 under title (Ahlul-Sunnah and the Incomplete way of Sending Salutations)

These are only examples from the same book and when looking at the rest of his books combined there is much more of the same.

As for him not referencing the information or highlighting its proper sources, then this is apparent to all readers of his books as it is a dominant aspect of them.

For instance, he quotes rejected and fabricated narrations then claims their authenticity without mentioning the sources he obtained them from the books of Ahlul-Sunnah:

Ḥadīth: “How many Qur’anic reciters are cursed by the Qur’an?”[57]

Ḥadīth: “My nation’s differences (in opinion) are a mercy.”[58]

Ḥadīth: “`Alī is the leader of the pious, slayer of the disbelievers.”[59]

Ḥadīth: “`Alī from me is such as my rank from my Lord.”[60]

Ḥadīth: “My Companions are like the stars, whomever of them you follow will guide you.”[61]

Ḥadīth: “Whatever Muḥammad permits remains permitted until the day of judgment.”[62]

Ḥadīth: “Jealousy for the man is belief but for the woman is disbelief.”[63]

Furthermore, he attributed unbefitting statements and actions to some Companions without citing his source. Such as saying that `Ā’ishah prevented Fātimah’s burial next to her father, or that she prevented Ḥusayn afterwards from burying al-Ḥasan next to his grandfather (peace be upon him), or that she rode a mule and began shouting “Don’t bury in my house those I dislike.”[64]

He then claims that al-Ḥusayn circulated around his grandfather’s grave with his brother al-Ḥasan after his death.[65]

He also accuses the Companions in general of hideous crimes, he writes:

“The historians have recorded surprising and strange things, that had occurred in those days, by those Companions who later became the Caliphs of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and commanders of the believers; like their forcing people to pay allegiance by violence, threats and power; their attack on the house of Fatima and searching it, and the pressure on her stomach with the door which she was behind, causing her to miscarry her child. And their coercing `Ali, with his hands tied, and threats to kill him if he refused to pay allegiance. Similarly, their denial of Fātimah’s rights, from gifts, inheritance and her share as a close relative. Up to her death, she was angry with them and she would pray against them in every prayer. Or like their dishonoring the women and transgressing the limits of Allāh in their killing of innocent Muslims and forcing themselves upon the women without observing the stipulated waiting period. Or like their altering the rulings of Allāh and His Prophet (peace be upon him) which are clear in the Book and the Sunnah and substituting them with judgments based on their personal reasoning that served their interests. Or like exiling and banishing of Abū Dharr al-Ghifārī from the city of the Prophet (peace be upon him). Or the insults and curses directed against the household, whom Allāh had cleansed and purified completely…”[66]

Among other concocted stories that he didn’t back with any evidence or attribute to any trustworthy source.

As for not researching matters properly, he often reaches conclusions based on his personal opinions without regard to evidence. We list some examples below as this is plentiful in his books:

He writes: “When Imam `Alī was martyred and Mu`āwiyah seized authority after the peace treaty he negotiated with Imam Ḥasan, he became commander of the believers. That year was called ‘al-Jama`ah’. Therefore the name Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah[67] indicates the Sunnah [tradition] of Mu`āwiyah and uniting around him, not following the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) example”[68]

And his saying: “But as soon as you become acquainted with the creed of the Imami Shī`ah in this respect, your conscience will be at rest and your mind will submit to accept the interpretation of the Qur’anic verses that contain incarnation or anthropomorphism to Allāh — the Exalted — holding them to indicate figurative meaning and metaphor, not reality or the superficiality of utterances, as imagined by some people”[69]

He says: “It is important for you to know why did `Umar change his mind concerning the oath of allegiance? I almost certainly believe that he had heard some Companions wishing to offer a pledge to `Alī bin Abī Ṭālib after `Umar’s death and this is something that `Umar would never allow”[70]

He even criticizes the amount of money, religious law prescribes to be offered as obligatory charity as well as taking tax from the non-believers as if he’s objecting to Allāh. He said: “The Islamic State can never be sustained through depending upon the Zakāt taken out by Ahlul-Sunnah, which never exceeds at best 2.5%. It is a very low percentage that can never meet the needs of the State, including: preparing a force, building the schools and hospitals, paving the roads, beside guaranteeing for every individual an income that can be sufficient for his livelihood and insuring his life. Furthermore, an Islamic State can never be dependent on bloody wars and conflict to safeguard its existence and develop its foundations at the cost of the slain people who were averse to Islam.”[71]

These are examples of matters and rulings where the author judges without academic research, backed by religious evidence or the words of a scholar, rather, only his own deviant whims and personal thoughts. He belies the texts, rejects the laws, and establishes historical tales as facts based on guesswork. He is pushed by his great grudge towards the pious predecessors and his love to support Shī`ah beliefs, so may Allāh treat him as he deserves.

VII – Opposing his Own Guidelines

Not only does Tijani not abide by the recognized foundations of authorship but he even defies the method he set-up for himself. Let me show you some of these rules he pinned down for himself and promised to follow in his research:


A- He promised to rid-himself of all emotions, desires and extremism so he may be fair and just.

He says: “I promised my God – if He led me on the right path – to rid myself from emotional bias and to be neutral and objective and to listen to what the two sides said, then to follow what was best.”[72]

He says in the same book: “I have promised my God to be fair, and I shall never be biased in favor of my creed, and will never use anything but the truth as my criterion.”[73]

He writes in his other book Ask Those Who Know: “Here the researcher should fear God in his research and should not let his sentiments overcome him so as to deviate from the truth and to follow his desires thereby being led astray from the path of God. It is obligatory for him to accept the truth, even if the truth lies with somebody else. He has to free himself from sediments [of feelings], sentiments and egoism.”[74]

This is what Tijani he says he chose but did he adhere to it?

Here is the answer O’ reader.

He says while praising the Shī`ah: “In fact I liked the way they worshipped; I liked their prayers, their manners, and the respect they gave to their learned people, and wished that I could be one of them.”[75]

He wrote: “Then I read the book “al-Murāja`āt” by Sayyid Sharaf-ul-Dīn al-Mūsawī, upon reading the first few pages I fell in loves with it and attracted me. I could not leave it unless it was necessary, and even took it with me to the institute.”[76]

He says: “I didn’t know how to convince myself or others of the opinions of Ahlul-Sunnah, since from what it seemed to me they relied on the sayings of the rulers from Banū Umayyah.”[77]

He says: “This is why I personally think that some of the Companions attributed the prohibition of Mut`ah to the Prophet, in order to justify and strenthen `Umar’s stance.”[78]

He writes: “This possibility pushes me: That `Umar bin al-Khattāb was the one who caused the rest of those present to feel reluctant and disobey the order of the Messenger of Allāh (peace be upon him).”[79]

These are examples of Tijani follow desires in his judgment. Just look at the expressions he uses when making a judgment: (I liked the way, attracted to it, from what it seemed, I personally think, this possibility pushed me, etc…) Just so that you know how he broke his promise in ridding himself of emotions and desires.

As for his promise to leave behind extremism and stick to fairness and neutrality, it is a lie as illustrated by his strong bias towards the Shī`ah, his praise for them and their creed as opposed to his constant attack on the people of Sunnah and their creed.

He expresses his view concerning Caliphate according to the people of Sunnah: “As for the Caliphate according to Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah, it is by selection and consultation. Thus, they opened a door that cannot be closed and they included in it every high person and every low person until it switched from Quraysh to the servants and slaves, then to the Persians, the Turks and the Mongols.”[80]

Then he talks about the Shī`ah view saying: “How great is the Shī`ah belief when it declares successorship to be from the foundations of religion. How great is their opinion that this position is given by the divine selection of the Glorious One. It is a wise and sound opinion, accepted by the intellect and backed by texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Whether the tyrants, kings and Sultans like it or not, this opinion brings rest and stability to society.”[81]

He says when discussing the Shī`ah belief of the corruption of the Qur’an, “So the corruption attributed to the Shī`ah is no more than a vilification and exaggeration, having no existence in the Shī`ah beliefs. When going through the Shī`ah view regarding the Holy Qur’an we can notice that they unanimously believe it’s preserved from corruption… This accusation, should be attributed to Ahlul-Sunnah rather than being ascribed to the Shī`ah. This was one of the motives urged me to reconsider all of my beliefs, as whenever I tried to criticize the Shī`ah and negate or disapprove them regarding anything, they would prove their innocence from it while turning the tables on me. Then, with passage of days, and through investigation, I recognized the truth of their claims.”[82]

He says while praising Shī`ah creed, adopting it and disowning the Companions whom he describes as renegades: “And I read more, until I became convinced that the Imami Shī`ah were right. Thus, with the help of Allāh, I boarded Ahlul-Bayt’s arc and sought their fellowship, because I found – thanks be to Allāh – the alternative to the Companions, who to the best of my knowledge, turned back on their heels while only a few of them were saved. I exchanged them for the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt, the Prophet’s Family, whom Allāh cleansed and purified.”[83]

These were samples of Tijani’s own words, showing how far he was from objectivity in his judgments. Instead, we see him oppress and lie by praising Shī`ah beliefs and criticizing the truth adopted by the people of Sunnah, such as when he talked about the caliphate according to both teams. Then his rejection of some of the vile Shī`ah beliefs and his denial that they possess any such beliefs, like the corruption of Qur’an that is popular in their books and agreed upon by their early scholars. Then he wrongfully attributes this belief to the people of Sunnah.

On top of that, he announces his adoption of Shī`ah beliefs and disassociating himself from Sunni beliefs. He also disowns the Companions and brands them as renegades, claiming that he reached this conclusion after strenuous research in order to fool the ignorant and unlearned readers. All this shows his impartiality and bias.

B- He states that the contents of his books are the truth and that he does not mention anything except what has been agreed upon by Sunni and Shī`ah.

He writes: “The titles of my first and second books are derived from the Holy Qur’an, which is the most truthful and best of speech. Also, all the information I compiled in both the books, if not true, then it is at least the nearest as can be to the truth, for it is what has been agreed upon which all Muslims, Sunnah and Shī`ah, and whose authenticity was approved by the two sects.”[84]

He says: “What both the Sunnah and Shī`ah agree upon is correct, since its authenticity is established by both sides, and we make them abide by it as they have accepted it themselves. As for what they differ upon, even if it is considered correct by one side, cannot be imposed on the opposite party. The neutral researcher cannot accept it or use it as argument.”[85]

His claim, that his books contain only truth or the nearest thing to it, is false. In fact, every innovator claims this, but in reality his books are the furthest thing away from the truth. It is sufficient evidence for us that he wrote it for the sole purpose of preaching Shī`ah ideology and calling people to it, even though they are drowned in blasphemy and misguidance. These are general points and the rest of the details will come in the refutation.

His other claim, that he only mentions what both sects have agreed on, is a pure lie. Here are some statements made by him that contradict this: “It is known amongst the scholar, since times of old, that `Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib is the one nominated by the Messenger of Allāh (peace be upon him) for succession.”[86]

Then while answering some of the questions that he claims to have received:

Why didn’t the Prophet (peace be upon him) appoint a successor for himself? He answered: “He (peace be upon him) had appointed a successor after the farewell pilgrimage; it was `Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib. Then he (peace be upon him) made his Companions who traveled with him to pilgrimage witness this, while knowing that the nation shall betray him and turn back on its heels.”[87]

Then his answer to the question: Did the Prophet (peace be upon him) know the time of his death? He replied: “No doubt he had known the date of his death. He learned this before he departed on his farewell pilgrimage and this is why he had named it as such. As a result, most Companions knew of this too.”[88]

When answering: Did the Prophet (peace be upon him) appoint Abū Bakr to lead the prayers? He says: “Through the contradicting narrations we understand that the Messenger (peace be upon him) did not appoint Abū Bakr to lead the prayers. Though we could believe this if we believed that that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was delusional, like `Umar did, those with such a belief are disbelievers.”[89]

He answers the question: Why did they fight those who withheld their Zakāt even though the Prophet (peace be upon him) forbade it? He replies: “Because some of the Companions who witnessed `Alī’s oath of allegiance at Ghadīr Khum, while returning from the farewell pilgrimage, withheld paying their Zakāt to Abū Bakr… No doubt some news must have reached them, that Fātimah fought with them and was angered by them, and that `Alī refrained from offering his allegiance. Due to all this, they refused to pay Zakāt to Abū Bakr until things cleared out.”[90]

There is plenty of nonsense in his books, which a overlooked for the sake of brevity, but this is enough evidence of his lies. It proves that what he writes in his books, in reality, is nothing more than the same old Shī`ah propaganda that he just repeats verbatim. Otherwise we ask: Where is the Sunni side of the answers he offered? Which Sunni agreed with such matters!?

C- His claim that he only uses as evidence what is counted as authentic or Ṣaḥīḥ according to the people of Sunnah.

He said: “And since I have committed myself not to argue but with the evidences used by the Shī`ah from the Ṣaḥīḥs of Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah, so I sufficed with these examples.”[91]

And: “I, in my turn, and as usual, to fulfill the commitment I undertook on myself in all the subjects discussed in this book, to not refer to except what is confirmed and authentic for Ahl al-Sunnah”[92]

And: “As I was about to embark on a long and difficult research, I promised myself to depend only on the authentic narrations that are accepted by both the Shī`ah and the Sunnah.”[93]

This also is a lie proven by his books that are filled with rejected and fabricated reports such as those we previously mentioned so no need to repeat them.

After this general criticism of Tijani’s methods, we observe: His ignorance, his lack of knowledge, his following of desires and reliance on conjecture, his weak academic research which must rely on reliable transmission and his injustice when issuing judgment.

Now we move from generality to a more detailed approach as we refute his main arguments in the four books (see top of the page).


[1] This introductory section is quoted loosely with modifications from “Al-Intisār lil-Ṣahb wal-Āl” by Dr. Ibrahīm al-Rahīlī pg.154-200

[2] Then I was guided pg.86-87

[3] Ibid pg.88

[4] Saḥīḥayn: Refers to both Sahih Bukhārī and Sahih Muslim.

[5] Ibid 152

[6] Ask those who know pg.119

[7] Ibid pg.119

[8] For example, al-Baqarah verses 8-20, 204-206. Aal-`Imran verses 120, 154. Al-Nisā’ verses 60-66, 72-73, 138-146. Al-Ma’idah verses 41, 52-53

[9] Check his bio in “Sīrat ibn Hishām” 2/620,469,555

[10] Sīrat ibn Hishām 2/548-557

[11] Then I was Guided pg.158

[12] Siyar A`lam al-Nubala’ 3/489

[13] Then I was Guided pg.14

[14] Ibid pg.14

[15] Ibid pg.16

[16] Ibid pg.17

[17] The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-sunnah pg.45

[18] Ibid pg.48-49

[19] Then I was Guided pg.172

[20] Ibid pg.172, 176, 191

[21] Ibid pg.82-83

[22] The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah pg.300

[23] Ibid pg.295

[24] Ibid pg.24, 49, 152, 229, 230.

[25] Ibid pg.232

[26] Ibid pg. 231

[27] Ibid pg.232

[28] Then I was Guided pg.173

[29] Ask Those Who Know pg.252

[30] The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah pg.110-111

[31] Ask Those Who Know pg.250-251

[32] Ask Those Who Know pg.164

[33] The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah pg.238

[34] Ibid pg.189

[35] Ibid pg.190

[36] Ibid pg.198

[37] Ibid pg.260

[38] Ibid pg.182

[39] To be with the Truthful pg.81

[40] Ask Those who Know pg.41

[41] To be with the Truthful pg.71

[42] Two Shaykhs: Refers to Abū Bakr al-Siddīq and `Umar bin al-Khattāb

[43] The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah pg.179

[44] To be with the Truthful pg.195

[45] Then I was Guided pg.36-37

[46] Ibid pg.43

[47] Muslim 4/2228 #2905

[48] Ask those Who Know pg.105

[49] Bukhārī 3/567 #1733

[50] Ask those Who Know pg.266

[51] Except for “Ask those Who Know” since he did divide it into sections even though he never bound himself to an academic method in presenting topics like the rest of his books.

[52] Khums: Dividing spoils of war into five parts and distributing them between the Muslims.

[53] Taqleed: To emulate an individual or school of thought in their understanding of religious law.

[54] Check all of these topics in his book To be with the Truthful pg.111-154

[55] The Shi’ah are the Real Ahlul-Sunnah pg.146-159

[56] Ibid pg.280-292

[57] Then I was Guided pg.180

[58] To be with the Truthful pg.20, 126

[59] Ibid pg.45

[60] Ibid pg.162

[61] Ibid pg.16

[62] Ibid pg.193

[63] Ask Those Who Know pg.80

[64] Then I was Guided pg.165

[65] Ibid pg.166

[66] Ask Those Who Know pg.159-160

[67] Ahlul-Sunnah wal-Jama`ah: Means the people who follow the prophetic-tradition and are the united majority.

[68] Then I was Guided pg.203

[69] To be with the Truthful pg.27

[70] Ibid pg.88

[71] Ibid pg.152

[72] Then I was Guided pg.92

[73] Ibid pg.101

[74] Ask those Who Know pg.36

[75] Then I was Guided pg.43

[76] Ibid pg.87

[77] Too be with the Truthful pg.150

[78] Ibid pg.195

[79] Then I was Guided pg.95

[80] To be with the Truthful pg.112

[81] Ibid pg.114

[82] Ibid pg.200-202

[83] Then I was Guided pg.156

[84] To be with the Truthful pg.7-8

[85] Ask Those Who Know pg.35

[86] Ibid pg.318

[87] Ibid pg.242

[88] Ibid pg.243

[89] Ibid pg.245

[90] Ibid pg.252

[91] To be with the Truthful pg.17

[92] Ibid pg.232

[93] Then I was Guided pg.88