The second: his statement, “during the Farewell Pilgrimage.” As you now know, this occurs in none of the routes except Ibn ‘Asakir’s feeble route. Yet, as you have seen, he attributed the hadith with this addition to sources other than Ibn ‘Asakir, though it is not found in them. This is manifest fabrication against them.

The third: his statement, “Whoever consults this hadith in Ahmad’s Musnad ...” and so forth, is blatant deception. For the Musnad contains nothing beyond the statement of Abu Ishaq, or of someone below him in the chain, concerning Habashi: “He had witnessed the Farewell Pilgrimage.” Anyone possessed of reason and knowledge knows that this sentence gives neither an explicit nor an implicit indication that Habashi ibn Junadah heard this hadith from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, during the Farewell Pilgrimage.

The fourth: his statement, “in their two Sahih collections,” is another deception. The works of al-Tirmidhi and al-Nasa’i are known as the Sunan, not as Sahih collections. How could they be, when both contain weak hadiths whose weakness is explicitly acknowledged by their own authors, let alone by others—particularly the former of the two? Moreover, al-Nasa’i did not transmit this hadith in his Sunan, but rather in al-Khasa’is, as mentioned above. This is yet another deception, even if, as seems apparent, he also called that work a Sahih.

The fifth: his statement, “through several routes.” This too is a lie, for it has, neither in the Musnad nor elsewhere, more than one route: that of Abu Ishaq al-Sabi‘i from Habashi. The routes are multiple only as far as al-Sabi‘i; and in such a case, it is not sound to say, “through several routes,” except of one who is lax or one who practises tadlis, such as this Shi‘ite.

The sixth: his statement, “all of them authentic.”

I say: This is a twofold lie, for it has only one route, as just explained. Moreover, this route cannot be deemed authentic because its sole transmitter—al-Sabi‘i—became confused in his later years, and because he narrates it using the ambiguous “from” formula, as previously explained. Know also that this Shi‘ite has many lies in the book mentioned, in addition to his ignorance of this field, his adducing weak and fabricated hadiths as evidence, and his impugning the Companions, the hadith imams, and Ahl al-Sunnah