Regarding Umar's Refusal to Give the Prophet (pbuh) a Pen to Write his Will... I will be grateful for your insight into a question posed by another Muslim (Wahabi I guess) regarding Hadith. Its a long question and please take your time for answering it. Accept my apologies for disturbing you once again. " As far as I am concerned the Arabs cannot have their cake and eat it too. They seem to use the Hadith as it exists today, but did not think Hadith was too special when the Prophet was alive. Here are some examples of Shahih Bokhari and Sahih Muslim Hadiths that I found very interesting. The Tragedy of Thursday, just three days before the demise of Prophet (PBUH&HF), the Messenger of Allah asked for pen and paper in order to state his last will. According to Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim an opposition group among the companions emerged, whose leader was Umar, It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that: Ibn Abbas said: "Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was!" Then Ibn Abbas cried severely so that his tears flowed to his cheeks. Then he added Prophet said: "Bring me a flat bone or a sheet and an ink so that I could write (order to write) a statement that will prevent you people to go astray after me." They said: "Verily the messenger of Allah is talking no sense." Reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of "Kitabul-Wasiyyah" in section "Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, P1259, Tradition (#1637/21). ========= The other version is given by al-Bukhari and Muslim which indicates the role of Umar in that catastrophe: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573 Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: When the time of the death of the Prophet approached while there were some men in the house, and among them was 'Umar Ibn al-Khatttab, the Prophet said: "Come near let me write for you a writing after which you will never go astray." 'Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us." The people in the house differed and disputed. Some of them said, "Come near so that Allah's Apostle may write for you a writing after which you will not go astray," while the others said what 'Umar said. When they made much noise and quarreled greatly in front of the Prophet, he said to them, "Go away and leave me." Ibn 'Abbas used to say, "It was a great disaster that their quarrel and noise prevented Allah's Apostle from writing a statement for them. The above tradition can also be found in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of "Kitabul- Wasiyyah" in section "Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah", 1980 Edition, Arabic version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1259, Tradition (#1637/22). Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.716 Narrated Ibn Abbas: Thursday! And how tragic that Thursday was! The ailment of Allah's Apostle became worse (on Thursday) and he said "Bring me something so that I (order) to write for you something after which you will never go astray." The people (present there) quarreled in this matter, and it was not right to quarrel in front of prophet. They said, "What is wrong with him? (Do you think) he is talking no sense (delirious)?" The above tradition is also in Sahih Muslim, Chapter of "Kitabul-Wasiyyah" in section "Babut-Tarkil-Wasiyyah", 1980 Edition, Arabic version, (Saudi Arabia), v3, pp 1257-58, tradition (#1637/20).========= More addresses for similar traditions: Sahih al-Bukhari, in the chapter named "The Book of Knowledge" (Kitabul-Ilm), also in the chapter named "The Book of Medicine" (Kitabut-Tib), also in the chapter named "Kitabul Itisam bil Kitab was-Sunnah". Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, v1,pp 232,239,324f,336,355. And much more... Also as indicated above (Sahih al-Bukhari Hadiths: 9.468 and 7.573), Umar said: "The Prophet is seriously ill, and you have the Qur'an, so Allah's Book is sufficient for us." Umar and those who supported him prevented prophet from writing (ordering to write) that statement, by accusing him of 'talking no sense'. There is a bizarre commentary in the footnote of above traditions in Sahih Muslim (1980 Edition, Arabic version). It says: """"The above incident shows the high virtue of Umar, since he knew that people might not follow what prophet would write, and as a result, people would go to hell because of their disobedience of the order of prophet. So Umar prevented Prophet from writing, so Umar prevented prophet from writing, in order to save people from going to hell ! So How do the same people who cite the following verses from the Qur'an, justify the above incident?: "O you who believe! Do not raise your voices above the voice of prophet ... lest your deeds become null while you do not perceive." (Qur'an 49:2). Allah also said: "Nor does he (prophet) speak out of his desire. (What he says) is nothing but revelation that is revealed." (Qur'an 53:3-4). also: "Whatever apostle tells you accept it, and from whatever he forbids you, keep back." (Qur'an 59:7).He also said: But NO by thy Lord! They can have no Faith until they make thee judge in ALL disputes between them and find in their souls no resistance against thy decisions but accept them with the fullest conviction. (Qur'an 4:65). So when such a prophet, three days before his death, wished to write a document of his will to save the Muslims from going astray, he was accused of talking no sense paranoid)! Umar says that the Qur'an is enough for us! The question is: Is it or is it not enough for us? do we believe Umar or not? Or did the Arabs have a right to selectively decide what and when they wanted to believe Mohammad?" Wassalam, Usman Reply First of all, let us take a look at the referred narrative of the event that took place. The narratives of the event can broadly be categorized into two types. Firstly, there are those narratives, which point out the presence and participation of Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) in the incident. Secondly, there are those narratives, which do not mention the name of any one of the companions. The common points in the two kinds of narratives of the event are: The event took place on Thursday, which was three to four days before the demise of the Prophet (pbuh); There were a number of people present at the place; The Prophet (pbuh) was in great pain; The Prophet (pbuh) asked for a scroll and a pen (or whatever else to write); The Prophet (pbuh) specified that whatever he wanted to write was something of great significance, which would keep the Muslims from straying from the right path forever; People started making a lot of noise; The Prophet (pbuh) was not given a scroll and a pen and thus, he could not write what he had desired. Besides these points, another important point, which is mentioned in a few of the recordings of this narrative in Bukhari , Muslim and Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal , is that later on, before his demise, the Prophet (pbuh) decided to direct the Muslims regarding three things. Firstly, he directed them to turn all the polytheists out of the Arabian Peninsula; secondly, he told them to receive and treat all delegations in the same manner as he himself used to treat them. While, as far as the third directive is concerned, narrators of these traditions have said that either the Prophet (pbuh) kept it to himself (did not say anything about it) or they forgot what he said. These are some of the important points regarding the text of the narratives of the cited incident. A close look at the subject matter of the narrations of the incident raises a few serious questions regarding the authenticity of these narrations. Some of the more important among these questions are: Why did the Prophet (pbuh) not mention the points that he had intended to write at the particular time of the incident, during the three to four days that followed the incident? We must remember that the Prophet (pbuh) lived for three to four days after the cited incident. We must also remember that the Prophet (pbuh) was deputed by God to deliver His message without paying any heed to those who opposed him. What is the position of the statements of the Qur'an, which emphatically state that adherence to it guarantees adherence to the straight path? Similarly, what is the position of the Prophet (pbuh)'s statement, which he spoke in front of all the Muslims who had gathered on the last Hajj gathering during the life of the Prophet (pbuh) in which he is reported to have said that "I have left with you something, which, as long as you adhere to it, shall never let you go astray - The Qur'an"? If there were yet some directives that the Muslims were to be told for keeping them on the straight path (which, ultimately were never told by the Prophet (pbuh) or were forgotten by those who heard those points), then why does the Qur'an or the Prophet (pbuh) say that the Qur'an guarantees adherence to the path that leads to the mercy of the Lord? The Qur'an has unequivocally stated that God's guidance to man has been completed for all times. No further guidance is required. Man, after the completion of this guidance, has now been provided with the lamp, which shall direct him to the path of everlasting success. Keeping this 'claim' of the Qur'an in perspective, it may be asked that if there were any points that the Muslims had not yet been told, and which had any significance whatsoever in their adherence to the path of success, then what exactly is the implication and meaning of the statement of the Qur'an that states that God's guidance has been completed for all times to come? It is obvious that unless satisfactory answers are provided to the above questions, the subject matter of this incident is not only against the Qur'an but is also against the more accepted narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh). Let us now take a look at the chain of narrators, which has reported the two versions of the cited incident [1] , as it has been reported in the more accepted compilations of narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh). As far as the narrative in which no companion has been singled out to have hindered the passing of a scroll and a pen to the Prophet (pbuh) is concerned, some important peculiarities in its chain of narrators that need to be kept in mind are: The first level narrator of this narrative is Abd Allah ibn Abbas (ra). Abd Allah ibn Abbas (ra) was a cousin of the Prophet (pbuh). At the time of the demise of the Prophet (pbuh), Abd Allah ibn Abbas (ra) was ten to fifteen years old. He died between 68 AH and 70 AH, which means that at the time of his death, Abd Allah ibn Abbas (ra) was between 65 and 70 years of age. It may be noted, however, that Ibn Abbas (ra) is the sole narrator of the referred incident. Although the narration of the incident clearly implies that at the time of the incident, a number of people were present on the scene, and although the gravity of the incident makes it a highly significant incident relating to the early history of the Muslims, yet no one besides Ibn Abbas (ra) has narrated the incident. The second level narrator of the incident is Sa`eed ibn Jubair . Sa`eed ibn Jubair died at the age of 49 in the year 94 or 95 AH. At the death of Ibn Abbas (ra), Sa`eed ibn Jubair was about 24 years old. It may be noted that like Ibn Abbas (ra) in the first level, there is no one besides Sa`eed ibn Jubair , in the second level, who has narrated the cited incident. Keeping in view the gravity and significance of the incident, one would expect Ibn Abbas (ra) to have reported this incident to every person he met during his life. However, contrary to this expectation, we see that during the first three to four decades after the incident, Ibn Abbas (ra) did not mention it to any one and even after this time, he mentions it to only one person and then remains silent about this grave incident for the rest of his life. The above facts imply that the incident, in its first version (in which none of the companions of the Prophet (pbuh) is singled out as having hindered the passing of a scroll and a pen to the Prophet), was known only to two persons during the first seventy years of its happening. Moreover, another important aspect of these chains of narrators is that all of them include people from or close to Iraq . In all the chains, the final narrator is generally an Iraqi or from a neighboring area. It should not be out of place to remind the readers that both Kufa and Basra , remained the center of origination of political turmoil even during the first century. In such an even it should not be very difficult to imagine that the whole incident may easily have been fabricated to defame the Prophet's companions (in this version, without naming any one of them) and thereby to establish that most of them did not pay much heed to the directives and/or desires of the Prophet (pbuh). As far as the second version is concerned (in which Umar (ra) has been singled out to have hindered carrying out the directive of the Prophet), once again the only narrator of this version in the first level of narrators is Ibn Abbas (ra). In the second and third level too, this narration is restricted to only one person in each generation, namely `ubaid Allah ibn Abd Allah ibn `utbah and Mohammed ibn Muslim ibn Shahab al-Zuhri , respectively. This implies that for three levels of narrators - covering a period of about 100 years - there was no more than one person in each level who has narrated this incident. Once again keeping the gravity of the incident in perspective, it seems quite strange that for about one hundred years, the narrators did not hold this incident to be of any significance. It is only after Mohammed ibn Muslim ibn Shahab al-Zuhri that the number of narrators has increased from one (only to two). However, Mohammed ibn Muslim ibn Shahab al-Zuhri is not a blemish less personality. Al-Zuhri , although, generally accepted to be reliable by the authorities in the science of Hadith , is considered to be a Mudrij [2] and a Mudallis [3] . Moreover, in a letter to Imam Malik , Imam Laith ibn Sa`d writes: Ibn Shahab would give many contradicting statements, when we would meet him. While if any one of us would ask him something in writing, he, in spite of being so learned, would give three contradictory answers to the same question. He would not even be aware of what he had said about the issue in the past. This is what prompted me to give up what you do not approve of [i.e. quoting a narrative on the authority of ibn Shahab ]. ( Ibn Qayyim, a`laam al- Muwaqqi'in , vol. 3, [Beirut: Daru'l-Jayl ], p. 85) These are just a few of the major questions that need to be satisfactorily answered before the cited incident is accepted to have really happened. Till that time, the cited incident cannot be accepted to be factual at least in the particular form in which it has been reported in the various compilations of the narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh). In my opinion, the incident has been (intentionally or unintentionally) misreported (or even fabricated) and wrongly ascribed to ibn Abbas (ra). I hope this helps. In case any question remains unanswered or if any further detail is required on any specific aspect, please feel free in writing back to me at your own convenience. May the Almighty guide us all to the path of His liking. My fondest regards to you and those around you. The Learner [1] That is one in which no companion has been singled out to have hindered the passing of a scroll and a pen to the Prophet (pbuh) and the second in which Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) has been named to have refused to allow the passing of a scroll and a pen to the Prophet (pbuh). [2] A person who inserts something in the text of a narrative without giving any indication of this insertion. [3] A person who narrates on the authority of someone whom, although he has met yet has not heard the narrated words from, giving the impression that he actually heard the narrated words from him.