|
|
Belief of Shia in the Completeness of Quran
A Wahhabi contributor mentioned that Shia believe Quran is not complete.
My answer to this matter is:
"Glory to (Allah), this is a big slander! (Quran
24:16)."
Shia do NOT believe that Quran is missing something. There are few weak
traditions which * might * imply to the contrary. Such reports are rejected
and unacceptable if they want to imply such a thing.
It is interesting to point out that there are numerous traditions reported
in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim which allege that many verses of Quran
are missing. Not only that, but also they these Sunni reports allege that
two chapters from the Quran are missing one of them was similar to chapter
9 (al-Bara'ah) in length!!! Some Sunni traditions even claim that the
Chapter al-Ahzab (Ch. 33) was as lengthy as the Chapter of Cow (Ch. 2)!!!
The Chapter of Cow is the biggest Chapter of the present Quran. The
traditions inside Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim even present some of the
missing verses. (Some of these traditions will be mentioned in the
following articles with full references.). Yet, fortunately Shia never
accuse the Sunni brothers and sisters of believing that the Quran is
incomplete. We say that either these Sunni reports are either weak or
fabricated.
The completeness of Quran is so indisputable among Shia that the greatest
scholar of Shia in Hadith, Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn Ali Ibn al-Husain Ibn
Babwayh, known as "Shaykh Saduq" (309/919-381/991), wrote:
"Our belief is that the Quran which Allah revealed to
His Prophet
Muhammad is (the same as) the one between the two
covers (daffatayn).
And it is the one which is in the hands of the people,
and is not
greater in extent than that. The number of surahs as
generally
accepted is one hundred and fourteen ...And he who
asserts that we say
that it is greater in extent than that, is a liar."
Shi'i reference: Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh
Saduq, English version, p77.
It should be noted that Shaykh Saduq (RA) is the greatest scholar of Hadith
among the Imami Shia and was given the name of Shaykh al-Muhaddithin (i.e.,
the most eminent of the scholars of Hadith). And since he wrote the above
in a book with the name of "The beliefs of the Imami Shia," it is quite
impossible that there could be any authentic Hadith in contrary to it.
It is noteworthy that Shaykh Saduq lived at the time of minor occultation
of Imam Mahdi (AS) and he was one of the earliest Shia scholars. He had the
honor that he was born with the prayer of Imam Mahdi (AS).
Another prominent Shia scholar is Allama Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar who wrote
in his Shia Creed book that:
"We believe that the Holy Quran is revealed by Allah
through the Holy
Prophet of Islam dealing with every thing which is
necessary for the
guidance of mankind. It is an everlasting miracle of
the Holy Prophet
the like of which can not be produced by human mind. It
excels in its
eloquence, clarity, truth and knowledge. This Divine
Book has not been
tampered with by any one. This Holy Book which we
recite today is the
same Holy Quran which was revealed to the Holy Prophet.
Any one who
^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^
claims it to be otherwise is an evil-doer, a mere
sophist, or else he
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
is sadly mistaken. All of those who have this line of
thinking have
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
gone astray as Allah in Quran said: "Falsehood can not
reach the Quran
from any direction (41:42)"
- Shi'i reference: The Beliefs of Shi'ite School, by Muhammad Ridha
Mudhaffar, English version, pp 50-51
Sayyid al-Murtadha, another prominent Shi'ite Scholar said:
"... our certainty of the completeness of the Quran is
like our
certainty of the existence of countries or major events
that are self
evident. Motives and reasons for recording and guarding
the Holy Quran
are numerous. Because the Quran is a miracle of the
Prophethood and
the source of Islamic Knowledge and religious rule,
their concern with
the Quran made the Muslim Scholars highly efficient
concerning
grammar, its reading, and its verses."
With this various concern by the most eminent Shia scholars, there is
no possibility that the Quran was added or deleted in some parts.
Besides what Allah mentioned in Quran about its protection, we can use our
logic to derive the same result. Allah sent his last Messenger to show
people (to the end of the time) His Right Path. Therefore if Allah does not
preserve His message, He would be contradicting His own aim. Obviously,
such negligence is evil according to reason. Thus, in essence, Allah
preserves His message as He preserved Moses in the house of His Enemy,
Pharaoh.
May Allah Bless Muhammad and his pure Ahlul-Bayt.
Different Arrangements of Quran
A Wahhabi alleged that it is reported in al-Kafi (one of the Shi'ite
Hadith collection) that the Shia Imam said: "No one compiled the Quran
completely except the Imams".
There is no such a tradition in Usul Kafi. I question the validity of the
booklets that have misquoted the traditions. What is written in Usul Kafi
in a tradition is as follows:
I heard Abu Ja'far (AS) saying: "No one (among ordinary
people)
claimed that he gathered the Quran completely as it was
revealed
except a liar; (since) no one has gathered it and
memorized it
completely as revealed by Allah, the Most High, except
Ali Ibn
Abi Talib (AS) and the Imams after him (AS)". (Usul al-Kafi,
v1,
p228, Hadith #1).
There are two other traditions which I will mention few lines later. The
above tradition does not say Quran is incomplete. Rather it states it is
not completely in the arrangement as it was sent down. The above
tradition is not something new. As a matter of fact, the Quran that we
use which was compiled by the companions is not in the sequence that has
been revealed. In fact, the Sunni scholars confirm that the first Chapter
of Quran which was sent down to the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was Chapter al-Iqra'
(al-Alaq, Ch. 96).
Sunni References:
- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi, v1, p259
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p202
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p417
- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani, v7, p454
As you know the Chapter al-Alaq is not at the beginning of the present
Quran. Also Muslims agree that the verse (5:3) was among one of the
last revealed verses of Quran (but not the very last one), yet it is not
toward the end of the present Quran. This proves that although the Quran
that we have available is complete, it is not in the order that has been
revealed.
I should point out that Imam Ali was not the only one who had a Quran with
different arrangements. According to the authentic Sunni reports, many
companions had different arrangement (sequence) of Quran, one of them was
Abdullah Ibn Masud:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.518
Narrated Shaqiq:
Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza'ir which the Prophet used to recite
in pairs in each Rak'a." Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied
him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those
Suras). He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
of al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas'ud, and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). and
"About what they question one another?" (78.1)
Thus this is nothing exclusive to Imam Ali. I should mention that the
prophet clearly indicated (by Sunni sources) that Abdullah Ibn masud is one
of whom should be trusted on the matter of Quran:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.521
Narrated Masriq:
'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I
shall
ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take
(learn) the
Quran from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai
bin
Ka'b.' "
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This man (Abdullah Ibn Masud) not only had a different Quran but also
(based on Sunni sources) he had a different sequence of chapters and
different set of aayaat. He alleged that the present Quran has some extra
words, and he swears in the name of Allah for his claim! (see Sahih al-
Bukhari, Arabic-English version, 6.468, 5.105, 5.85). He also falsely
alleged that the last two chapters of Quran are not Quranic chapters and
they are only some prayers (Du'aa). (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English
version, 6.501)
According to the Shia, these allegations by the companions reported in
Sahih al-Bukhari concerning Quran having extra words are FALSE. No single
verse of Quran is extra.
Also it seems that Aisha has a different opinion as to which chapter was
revealed first:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.515
Narrated Yusuf bin Mahk:
While I was with Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person
from
^^^^^
Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha
said,
"May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said,
"O
mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Quran,"
She said,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Quran
according
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
to it, for people recite it with its Surahs not in proper
order."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read
first? (Be
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was
a Sura
^^^^^^^^^^^
from al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the
Fire.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The second tradition in Usul Kafi which has been widely misinterpreted,
states that what has been revealed to Prophet was as much as 17000 verses.
Although this tradition is not rated authentic, there are two
explanations for that. The first possibility mentioned by our scholars
is that, the verses of Quran were originally shorter, and when the
companions compiled the Quran, they appended short verses and thereby
the number of verses reduced without any change to content of Quran.
The second possibility is that which was given by Shaikh Saduq (RA)
who is the number one Shi'a scholar in the field of Hadith:
"We say that so much of revelation has come
down which is not
embodied in the present Quran that if it
were to be collected, its
extent would undoubtedly be 17000 verses
... Although all of
them were revelation but they (the extra
ones) are NOT a part of
Quran. If they would be a part of Quran, it
would surely have been
included in the Quran we have."
Shi'i reference: Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh
Saduq, English version, pp 78-79.
The transcript of the Quran that Imam Ali wrote contained commentary
and hermeneutic interpretation (Tafsir and Ta'wil) from the Holy
Prophet some of which had been sent down as revelation but NOT as a
part of the text of Quran. A small amount of such texts can be found in
some traditions in Usul al-Kafi and else. These pieces of information were
Divine commentary of the text of Quran which was revealed along with
Quranic verses but were NOT parts of Quran. Thus the commentary verses
and Quranic verses could sum up to 17000 verses. As Sunnis know, Hadith
Qudsi is also revelation, but they are not a part of Quran. In fact Quran
testifies that anything that Prophet said was revelation. Allah Almighty
said in Quran about Prophet Muhammad that:
"Nor does he (Muhammad) speak out of his desire. It is
no less than
a revelation that is revealed." (Quran 53:3-4).
Thus all the speeches of Prophet were revelation, and surely the speeches
of Prophet was not limitted to Quran. It includes interpretation of Quran
(part of which were direct revelation) as well as his Sunnah (part of which
were indirect revelation).
The third tradition in Usul Kafi which is misinterpreted is as follows:
Abu Jafar said: "No one can claim that he completely
has the Quran
with its appearance (Dhahir) and its meaning (Batin),
except the
executors (Awsiyaa)." (Usul al-Kafi, Tradition #608).
again this tradition is referring to the fact that the commentary of Quran
is missing. Although we have the appearance of Quran, its meaning (i.e.,
divine commentary) is not with it. The traditions refers to the Quran which
was compiled by Imam Ali (AS) which included the commentary.
In a follow up article, I will give some information about the Quran which
was compiled by Imam Ali (AS) which included all the above-mentioned divine
commentaries.
It is necessary to emphasize here that all grand scholars of the Imami Shia
are in agreement that the Quran which is at present among the Muslims is
the very same Quran that was sent down to the Holy Prophet, and that it has
not been altered. Nothing has been added to it, and nothing is missing from
it. The Quran which was compiled by Imam Ali (excluding the commentaries)
and the Quran that is in the hand of people today, are identical in terms
of words and sentences. No word, verse, chapter is missing.
A Wahhabi mentioned that al-Kafi is an authentic book of Hadith for the
Shia, and as such Shia believe that Quran is not complete.
The above conclusion is based on two wrong hypotesis. First what was
mentioned in the book of al-Kafi does not necessarily indicate that Quran
is incomplete (see the above explanation). Second, we do not consider al-
Kafi to be all-authentic book of tradition, nor his auther ever mentioned
such a thing.
It is true that al-Kafi is among the most important Shia collections of
traditions. The traditions of al-Kafi cover all the branches of faith and
ethics, and all the fundamental of fiqh (jurisprudence). It includes more
traditions than all 6 Sunni collections together (provided that if we
remove the repetitions). For instance, al-Kafi has 16121 traditions, while
Sahih al-Bukhari which has many repetition in itself has only 7275
traditions. If we remove the repetitions, al-Kafi has 15176 traditions
while Sahih al-Bukhari will end up with 4000 traditions. The traditions
mentioned here include both Usul al-Kafi and Furu' al-Kafi.
The author of al-Kafi, Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Yaqub al-Kulain al-Razi (d.
329/941), may Allah have mercy upon his soul, is considered to be highly
honest and highly reliable. However, we should emphasize that neither the
traditions are equal in value and significance, nor are the supportive
evidence for the narrations. The authorities of the chain of narrations are
not also equal in terms of reliability and credibility, and one can in NO
way regard them as equally dependable.
A glance at the book entitled "Mir'atul Uqul" (reflection of the minds)
will reveal this very point to the researcher in more detail. "Mir'atul
Uqul" is an explanatory book to al-Kafi written by another great Shia
scholar of Hadith, Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d. 1111/1700) who is among the
most loyal and faithful to the book of al-Kafi. Majlisi has rated some of
the traditions of al-Kafi as WEAK. However, being weak, does not mean the
tradition is forged. If one of the chain of the authorities of a tradition
is missing, then the tradition is weak in Isnad without regard to its content.
In fact, there are a number of traditions in al-Kafi which have one or more
elements from the chain of narrators are missing. As such, all of them are
regarded weak in Isnad. It might also be that a tradition is specific for
a person who reported it from Imam, and may not have meant for the whole
people. This very point is mentioned in Usul al-Kafi itself:
Ibn Abi Ya'fur said, I inquired of Abu Abdillah (AS)
about the
different traditions related by those whom we trust and
also by those
whom we don't." Hearing this, the Imam (AS) replied:
"Whenever you
receive a tradition which is borne out by any verse
from the book of
Allah or by a (established) saying of the Prophet
(PBUH&HF), then
accept it. Otherwise, the tradition is meant only for
the one who has
brought it to you." (Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English
version, Tradition
#202)
Shaikh al-Kulaini (RA), the author of al-Kafi, in the introduction of his
book, mentioned the following:
Brother, may Allah lead you to the right path. You
ought to
know that it is not for anyone to distinguish the truth in
the
conflicting narrations attributed to the Ulama (i.e., Imams),
peace be upon them, except through the standards which were
declared by al-Alim (i.e., the Imam), peace be upon him:
"Test
the (conflicting) traditions by the Book of Allah, and that
which agrees with it take it, and that which disagrees with
it
reject it..." (Usul al-Kafi, Arabic version, Introduction by
al-
Kulaini, v1)
Is there any explanation better than that of the author? He mentioned that
there are some conflicting narrations in his book, al-Kafi. He also mentioned
that we should follow those Hadiths that are in agreement with the Book of
Allah, and leave that which is in clear disagreement with Quran. To prove
this point, al-Kulaini (RA) quoted a part of the Hadith of Ahlul-Bayt (AS)
that, in fact, confirms it as a criterion for the all the followers of
Ahlul-Bayt (AS).
After all, do the opponents of Shi'a expect us to leave what the author of
al-Kafi confirmed in his own book, and to believe their false accusation that
al-Kafi is all-authentic Hadith collection for the Shi'a?
Also a Wahhabi mentioned that in the introduction to the al-Kafi, it is
written that the al-Mahdi has examined the book and said that it is good
for his followers.
There is no such a thing in the introduction written by al-Kulain himself
(who is the author of al-Kafi). This is what another person has mentioned
in his own introduction to introduce al-Kafi and its author, which is
placed before the introduction of the author. Also you did not correctly
mentioned what is attributed to Imam Mahdi (AS). If such report is ever
true, Imam Mahdi (AS) said:
"al-Kafi is sufficient of our Shia (followers)."
There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, as I mentioned, al-Kafi's
traditions cover all the branches of faith and ethics, and all the
fundamentals of fiqh. Imam Mahdi (AS) did NOT say whatever written in it is
correct. Rather he [reportedly] said, it is sufficient, and includes all
what his followers need in terms of the traditions. Again, such tradition
is not mentioned by al-Kulain himself.
al-Kafi means something that is sufficient. It does not mean all its
content are perfectly correct, since the narrators were not perfect.
Actually the reason that the author named his book al-Kafi was explained in
the introduction of the book written by himself. The scholars of his time
asked him to compile a book of traditions which covers all necessary
branches of religion of Islam. He wrote in his introduction that:
... and you complained that there is no book that could
cover all the
^^^^^^^^^
branches of the knowledge of religion (Ilm al-Din) to
save the seeker
of truth from referring to many books and which could
not suffice as a
^^^^^^^
guide and source of spiritual light in the matters of
theology and the
traditions of rightly guided Imams, peace be upon them.
You expressed
the urgent need of such a book and I hope that the
present book would
serve this purpose. (Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English
version,
Introduction by al-Kulaini, part 1, pp 17-18)
al-Kulaini (RA) is not one of the twelve Imams of the Shi'ites. He was only
a Hadith recorder who reported what was conveyed to him through one or more
sources. He never said that he heard from Imam al-Sadiq (AS), and he stated
only a Hadith that came to him through some reporters. Let it be stated
that the tradition of al-Kafi or any other Shia/Sunni book is NOT
acceptable to the Imami Shi'ites if it wants to ever imply the
incompleteness of the Quran. These few traditions are rated weak. Even if
we suppose that they are true, then the extra verses would mean the divine
commentary of Quran which were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad along with
Quran but not as a part of Quran as Shaykh Saduq and other scholars
specified.
So, if one brings a weak tradition from Usul al-Kafi and then misinterpret
the Hadith, it can not represent a belief of the Shia. However, when Sunnis
claim that Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are all-authentic, they will
have a big problem when they reach to those traditions in these books which
allegedly imply the incompleteness of Quran. Do you see the difference, my
friend?
In book, entitled "Science of Hadith" written by Zainul-Abideen Qurbani,
discusses in great detail the traditions in which may imply the
incompleteness of the Quran. Here is one passage from it:
More than 95% of Shia scholars believe that there has
been absolutely
no tampering of the Quran and that the Quran we hold in
our hands
today is exactly the same Quran that was revealed to
Muhammad (saw),
without a single word missing or being extra. To quote
the words of
Shia scholars in this regard would require a whole
separate treatise.
But we briefly name just a few of them:
Beginning with Shaikh Suduq, whose words we already
quoted, to Shaikh
Mofid, Sayyed Murtada, Shaikh Tusi,..., Allamah Hilli,
Muqaddas
Aridibili, Khashif al-ghitaa, Shaikh Bahai, Fayz
Kashani, Shaikh Hurr
Ameli, Mohaqiq Kurki, Sayyed Mehdi Bahr ul-Uloom,
Sayyed Muhammad
Mujahid Tabataba'i, Shaikh Muhammad Husain Ashtiyani,
Shaikh Abdullah
Mamqani, Shaikh Javad Balaghi, Sayyed Hibbat al-Din
Shahristani,
Sharif Radi, Ibn Idris, Sayyed Mohsin Amin Ameli,
Sayyed Abdul-Husain
Sharif al-Din, Sayyed Hadi Milani, Sayyed Muhammad
Husain Allamah
Tabataba'i, Sayyed Abul-Ghasim Khoei, Sayyed Muhammad
Rada
Golbayegani, Sayyed Shahab al-Din Mar'ashi Najafi,
Ruhullah Khomeini,
etc.
The author then goes on to quote several pages of statements by top Shia
scholars about the completeness and perfect authenticity of the Holy Quran.
It is hoped that what was offered on this subject is sufficient for those
who try to find the truth, that the Shia are the true believers in Quran.
It is improper for those who seek the truth to accuse others of something
which they are entirely innocent of.
Wassalam
--------
Some of the references of this article:
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic English version
- al-Imam al-Sadiq, printed by Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi Egypt
- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani
- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani
- al-Kafi, printed by al-Haidari Printings - Tehran, Iran
- Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq
- Masadir al-Hadith 'Indal Shia al-Imamiyyah", by Muhammad Husain Jalali
- Science of Hadith, by Zainul-Abidin Qurbani
Some Sunni Reports on the Incompleteness of Quran
There are some traditions in Sihah Sittah (six authentic Sunni collections)
which are not accepted by Shia scholars. Among them, some are talking about
the changes made in Quran * after * the death of the Prophet. As I will
show, in some Sunnis report 345 verses, two chapters of Quran (one of which
is was as much as ch.9 in length) are missing from Quran. Here I give you
some references in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and other important
collections which falsely allege that Quran is incomplete. Let me first
start with Sahih Muslim.
============
Sahih Muslim
============
Muslim in the Seventh ( 7th ) part of his Sahih, in the book of Al
Zakat about the virtue of being satisfied with what ever God gives
about urging people to have that virtue, pp 139-140 (Arabic),
reported that Abu al-Aswad reported that his father said :
*(For English version of Sahih Muslim see)*
*(Chapter CCCXCI, p500, Tradition #2286)*
Abu Musa al-Ashari invited the Quran readers of Basra.
Three
hundred ( 300 ) readers responded to his invitation. He
told
them
You are the readers and the choice of the People of
Basra. Recite the Quran and don't neglect it. Other
wise a long time may elapse and your hearts will ne
hardened as the hearts of those who came before you
were hardened.
We used to read a Chapter from the Quran similar to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Bara'ah in length and seriousness, but I forgot it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I can remember from the Chapter only the following
words :
Should a son of Adam own two valleys full of wealth, he
should
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
seek a third valley and nothing would fill Ibn Adam's
abdomen
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
but the soil.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
We also used to read a chapter similiar to the
Musabbihat and I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
forgot it. I only remember out of it the following:
"Oh you who believe, why do you say what you do not do?
(which is
now in another place in Quran 61:2) Thus a testimony
shall be
written on your necks and you will be questioned about
it on the
day of judgment." (which is a little different than
what is in
another place in Quran 17:13)
It is obvious that the above underlined words which Abu Musa mentioned are
not from the Quran nor they are similar to any of the Words of God in the
Quran. It is amazing that Abu Musa claims that two ( 2 ) chapters from the
Quran are missing one of them is similar to Bara'ah in length!!! The
following traditions are before the above tradition in Sahih Muslim:
Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI, Tradition
#2282:
Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him)
as saying: "If
the son of Adam were to possess two valleys of riches,
he would long
for the third one. And the stomach of the son of Adam
is not filled
but with dust. And Allah returns to him who repents."
Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI, Tradition
#2283:
Anas b. Malik reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah
(peace be
upon him) as saying this (the sentence of the above
tradition),
but I do not know whether this thing was revealed to
him or not,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
but he said so.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI, Tradition
#2284:
Anas b. Malik reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be
upon him) as
saying: If there were two valleys of gold for the son
of Adam, he
would long for another one, and his mouth will not be
filled with
dust, and Allah returns to him who repents.
Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI, Tradition
#2285:
Ibn Abbas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon
him) as
saying: If there were for the son of Adam a valley full
of riches, he
would long to possess another one like it, and Ibn Adam
does not feel
satisfied but with dust. And Allah returns to him who
returns (to
Him). Ibn Abbas said: I do not know whether it is from
Quran or not,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and in the narration transmitted by Zubair it was said:
I do not know
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
whether it is from the Quran, and he made no mention of
Ibn Abbas.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Muslim also reported in the book of nursing ( al-Ridha ), v10
pages 29 (Arabic), that Aisha said the following :
There was in what was revealed in the Quran that ten (
10 ) times
of nursing known with certainty makes the nursing woman
a mother
of the nursed child. This number of nursing would make
the woman
'Haram' to the child. Then this verse was replaced by '
five ( 5 )
known nursing ' to make the woman forbidden to the
child. The
Prophet died while these words were recorded and read
in the Quran.
Also al-Zamakhshari recorded that Aisha said that the Quranic verse
enjoining stoning for adultery was written on a leaf, but the leaf
was accidentally eaten by a goat while the Prophet Muhammad was on his
death-bed, and thus the verse was lost.
Umar [reportedly] Said Chapter 33 Is Incomplete:
al-Muttaqi Ali Ibn Husam al-Din in his book ( Mukhtasar Kanz al-Ummal,
printed on the margin of Imam Ahmed's Musnad, v2, p2 ) in his Hadith about
chapter 33, that said Ibn Mardawayh
reported that Huthaifah said:
Umar said to me : How many verses are contained in the
Chapter al-Ahzab ? I said 72 (
seventy two ) or 73 ( seventy
three ) verses. He said : It was
almost as long as the chapter
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
of the Cow, which contains 287 ( two
eighty seven ) verses, and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^
in it there was the verse of stoning.
If we take the report of Ibn Mardawayh which Huthaifah attributed to Umar
in which he said that the Chapter of al-Ahzab, which contained 72 ( Seventy
two ) verses, was as long as the Chapter of the Cow ( containing 287 ) and
take the report of Abu Musa which says that a chapter equal in length to
the Chapter of Bara'ah ( contains 130 ) was deleted from the Quran, then
the deletion in the Quran according to these reports would be 345 Verses.
^^^^^^^^^^^
================
Sahih al-Bukhari
================
Al-Bukhari recorded in his Sahih, v8, pp 209-210, that
Ibn Abbas reported that Umar Ibn al-Khattab said the following in
a discourse which he delivered during the last years of the caliphate.
*(For Arabic-English version of Sahih al-Bukhari see 8.817:)*
When Umar performed his last Hajj, he said:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with the truth and
revealed
him the Book. One of the revelations which came
to him
was the verse of stoning. We read it and
understood it.
The Messenger of God stoned and we stoned after
him. I am
concerned that if time goes on, some one may say
' By God
we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book
of God ';
thus, the Muslims will deviate by neglecting a
commandment
the Almighty revealed.
Again, we used to read in what we found in the
Book of God :
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do not deny the
fatherhood of your fathers in contempt
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
because it is a
disbelief on your part to be ashamed of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
your fathers.
^^^^^^^^^^^^
More references of similar tradition:
- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (in the Musnad of Umar under the caption of
the Hadith al-Saqeefah, pp 47,55)
- Sirah of Ibn Hisham (Pub. by Issa al-Babi al-Halabi of Egypt 1955),
v2, p658
The above Hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari (Tradition 8.817 ) as well as
similar ones in Sahih al-Bukhari (Tradition 8.816 and 9.424(B)) all say
"Umar's last Hajj". Would you tell us when this Hadith could have been
told originally? How long had it been passed by then from the death of
prophet? Or from the gathering of Quran?
Please also note that the above verse which was recited by Umar in the
above tradition, is not in present Quran.
The following Hadith is narrated without any Hadith number in Bukhari.
It is in the title of one of the chapter of Bukhari. Fortunately, it
was translated by the translator.
Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, vol 9, p212:
{Between Traditions 9.281 and 9.282}
(21) CHAPTER. If a judge has to witness in favor of a
litigant when
he is a judge or he had it before he became a judge
(can he pass a
judgment in his favor accordingly or should he refer
the case to
another judge before whom he would bear witness?). And
the judge
Shuraih said to a person who sought his witness, "Go to
the ruler so
that I may bear witness(before him) for you." And
'Ikrima said, "Umar
said to 'Abdur-Rahman bin 'Auf, 'If I saw a man
committing illegal
sexual intercourse or theft, and you were the ruler
(what would you
do)?. 'Abdur-Rahman said, 'I would regard your witness
as equal to the
witness of any other man among the Muslims. 'Umar said,
'You have
said the truth.' 'Umar added:
If I were not afraid of the fact that people may say
that 'Umar has
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
added to the Quran extra (verses), I would have written
the Verse al-
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Rajm (stoning to death of married adulterers) with my
own hands.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
and Ma'iz confessed before the Prophet that he had
committed illegal
intercourse, whereupon the prophet ordered him to be
stoned to death.
It is not mentioned that the prophet sought witness of
those who were
present there.
Hammad said, "If an adulterer confesses before a ruler
once only, he
should be stoned to death." But al-Hakam said, "He must
confess four
times.
My questions here are:
1)- Do you agree that Umar stated clearly that the verse famous as
Rajm was in Quran originally (or was revealed originally)?
2)- To discuss the second part, I have given it more closely below:
.-----------------------------------------------------------.
| If I were not afraid of the fact
that people may say |
| that 'Umar has added to the Quran
extra (verses), I |
| would have written the Verse
Ar-Rajm (stoning to death |
| of married adulterers) with my own
hands.
|
|___________________________________________________________|
2.a)- Was Umar afraid of people talking behind him so
and so?
2.b)- Was he afraid of God MORE at the same time he was
saying?
(Was he MORE fearful of
God, or afraid of people MORE than
God?)
2.c)- Is anybody allowed to be afraid of people when
revealing the
truth about Quran
is more important?
3)-
3.1)- If Umar were NOT afraid of people, would he have
been
writing the verse
inside of Quran by his hand or not?
3.2)- If you were Umar, with the same knowledge and
courage, would
you have been
adding this verse to Quran by your hand or
not?
4)-
4.1)- Was Umar aware of abrogation or
not?
4.2)- Was he aware of abrogation more
than present scholars or
not?
5)- Did he know that he should (or should NOT) have been adding the
verse inside of Quran if it is abrogated or not? (This is not accepted
by Shia. I will explain this situation very shortly. Some Sunnis say
that it can be abrogated practically, and remained OUTSIDE of Quran.
My question is that
Did he know that he should NOT have been adding this verse
inside Quran since it is only practically abrogated? )
In other words, if he knew the rule, why he insisted on adding it, If he
did not know that, is the above rule an invention of some of Sunni
people who wanted to justify missing this verse?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is another example, that after the death of Prophet its is
alleged that the phrase "Him who created" has been added to verse 92:3.
One of the narrator of this counterversy is Abdullah bin Masud. As I
mentioned, The prophet clearly indicated (by Sunni sources) that
Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of
Quran.
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.468:
-------
Narrated Ibrahim:
The companions of 'Abdullah (Ibn Mas'ud) came to Abu Darda', (and
before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them.
Then he asked them,: 'Who among you can recite (Quran) as 'Abdullah
recites it?" They replied, "All of us." He asked, "Who among you knows
it by heart?" They pointed at 'Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. "How did
you hear 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud reciting Surat al-Lail (The Night)?"
Alqama recited:
'By the male and the female.' Abu Ad-Darda said, "I testify that I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
heard me Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to
^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
recite it:--
'And by Him Who created male and female.' but by Allah, I will not
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^
follow them."
^^^^^^^^^^^^
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5. 85:
-------
Narrated 'Alqama:
...Abu Darda further asked, "How does 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) recite the
Surah starting with, 'By the Night as it conceals (the light)." (92.1)
Then I recited before him:
'By the Night as it envelops: And by the Day as it appears in
brightness; And by male and female.' (91.1-3) On this Abu Ad-Darda'
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
said, "By Allah, the Prophet made me recite the Surah in this way while
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I was listening to him (reciting it)."
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.105:
-------
Narrated Alqama:
I went to Sham and was offering a two-Rak'at prayer; I said, "O Allah!
Bless me with a (pious) companion." Then I saw an old man coming
towards me, and when he came near I said, (to myself), "I hope Allah
has given me my request." The man asked (me), "Where are you from?" I
replied, "I am from the people of Kufa." He said, "Weren't there
amongst you the Carrier of the (Prophet's) shoes, Siwak and the
ablution water container? Weren't there amongst you the man who was
given Allah's Refuge from the Satan? And weren't there amongst you the
man who used to keep the (Prophet's) secrets which nobody else knew?
How did Ibn Um 'Abd (i.e. 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud) use to recite
Surat al-Layl (The Night; ch. 92)?" I recited:--
"By the Night as it envelops By the Day as it appears in brightness.
And by male and female." (92.1-3) On that, Abu Darda said, "By Allah,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
the Prophet made me read the Verse in this way after listening to
him, but these people (of Sham) tried their best to let me say
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
something different."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-------------------------------------------
Comments:
Please read the Verse itself. It is
By Him Who created male and the female.' (92:3)
Do you see the word "Him who created" in that aayah?
If no, please verify the Quran that you have.
If yes, please tell us that these words are added to Quran or not?
As you see, what is written in the parentheses is missing in the
Hadith while it is in the Quran.
Do you think that the aayah is abrogated? If yes, please define
the word "abrogation " for us.
{Abrogation is to delete something from Quran by the order of the
prophet himself. For example, there is a rule for a while, then the
prophet brings God's order that the rule is extended and the previous
rule is not acceptable any more. Therefore, the previous rule is
abrogated. Now, do you think that "Him who created" is abrogated?
If yes, tell us what you understand from abrogation. Since these words
are added, there is no room for abrogation here. If something were
deleted, you could say that. Here, nothing is deleted from the present
Quran. Something is added already based on these traditions.}
Do you think that these words were explanatory words?
Your answer: Yes, they were:
Please tell us if the narrators of these traditions knew what
is
aayah and what is explanatory(commentary) statement?
These narrators say that the people of their time did not
recite
their way, however, THEY WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING, and THEY
WILL
CONTINUE RECITING QURAN THAT WAY.
In addition, the commentary statements is not inside the
Quran
itself. It is in tafsir. However, present Quran contains
these
words "him who created" inside them. Now, please tell us that
the present Quran contains the commentary words of Sahabah or
not?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sunnis narrated that after the death of prophet, Quran was gathered in
different ways, and by different people. Those who did not accept the
government' Quran (which was gathered by Abu-Bakr) kept their version
of Quran at home and did not show it publicly. However, they did
recite them as they wanted in public domain.
Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of famous narrators of sunni sources.
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.521:
-------
Narrated Masriq:
'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I
shall
ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take
(learn) the
Quran from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai
bin
Ka'b.' "
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^
^^^^^
The prophet clearly indicated (by sunni sources) that
Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of
Quran.
He, himself, says that:
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.524:
-------
Narrated 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) : By Allah other than Whom none has
the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in Allah's Book
but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no Verse
revealed in Allah's Book but I know about whom.
This man had a different Quran (based on Sunni sources) with a different
sequence of chapters and different set of aayaat. As I pointed out , he
narrated that one aayat inside the present Quran has an extra word
"Him Who created". and He told this to people in different area.
One of these differences are the last two chapters of Quran. He believed
that these two chapters are not Quranic chapters and they are only some
prayers (Du'aa).
Please read the following traditions very carefully.
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.501:
-------
Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:
I asked Ubai bin Ka'b, "O Abu AlMundhir! Your brother, Ibn Mas'ud said
so-and-so (i.e., the two Mu'awwidh-at do not belong to the Quran)."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Ubai said, "I asked Allah's Apostle about them, and he said, 'They
have been revealed to me, and I have recited them (as a part of the
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Quran)," So Ubai added, "So we say as Allah's Apostle has said."
^^^^^^
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.500:
-------
Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:
I asked Ubai bin Ka'b regarding the two Muwwidhat (Surats of taking
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
refuge with Allah). He said, "I asked the Prophet about them, He said,
'These two Surats have been recited to me and I have recited them (and
^^^^^^
are present in the Quran).' So, we say as Allah's Apostle said (i.e.,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
they are part of the Quran"
%%%% %%%%
%%%% Note: %%%% %%%%
%%%%
The explanations inside the parentheses are from the translator (Muhammad
Muhsin Khan, University of al-Medina, Saudi Arabia). They are not mine.
%%%% %%%%
%%%% %%%%
%%%% %%%%
My comments:
1)- Do you agree that the speaker of these two traditions are "Ubai-ibn-
Ka'b"?
2)- Do you agree that he was talking about these two chapters of Quran?
3)- Do you agree that in the first Hadith, the subject is about "Ibn-
Masud"?
4)- Do you agree that Ubai-Ibn-Ka'b said that these two chapters are
inside of Quran, and Ibn-Masud thought that these two are not
inside of
Quran?
5)- Do you trust Ubai-Ibn-Ka'b on this matter, or do you trust
"Ibn-Masud" on THIS matter?
6)- If you reject any of them, how do you justify your act with the
first Hadith in this article where both of them are trusted
by the
prophet? How can you REMOVE and NOT remove these two chapters
from
Quran? Please explain, bring evidences, and references for
any Hadith
you may quote. Thanks. (I already know what you may quote, so
please
be careful in quoting them.)
As I said, these traditions are REJECTED by Shia since they are clearly
illogical, and against the true content of Quran.
This man, Abdullah-Ibn-Masud, had a different set of Quran too.
Please read the following Hadith and explain to us whether the Quran
of Abdullah Ibn Masud was the same as your Quran.
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.518:
-------
Narrated Shaqiq:
Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza'ir which the Prophet used to recite
in pairs in each Rak'a." Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied
him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those
Suras). He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
of al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas'ud, and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). and
"About what they question one another?" (78.1)
--------------------------------------------------------------
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.514:
-------
Narrated 'Umar bin al-Khattab:
I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat al-Furqan during the lifetime
of Allah's Apostle and I listened to his recitation and noticed that
he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle had not
taught me. I was about to jump over him during his prayer, but I
controlled my temper, and when he had completed his prayer, I put his
upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said, "Who
taught you this Surah which I heard you reciting?" He replied, "Allah's
Apostle taught it to me." I said, "You have told a lie, for Allah's
Apostle has taught it to me in a different way from yours." So I
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said (to Allah's Apostle),
"I heard this person reciting Surat al-Furqan in a way which you
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
haven't taught me!" On that Allah's Apostle said, "Release him, (O
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
'Umar!) Recite, O Hisham!" Then he recited in the same way as I heard
him reciting. Then Allah's Apostle said, "It was revealed in this
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
way," and added, "Recite, O 'Umar!" I recited it as he had taught me.
^^^^
Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed in this way. This Quran
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so recite of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
it whichever (way) is easier for you (or read as much of it as may be
^^^^^^^^^
easy for you)."
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6. 53:
-------
Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:
I said to 'Uthman bin 'Affan (while he was collecting the Quran)
regarding the Verse:-- "Those of you who die and leave wives ..."
(2.240) "This Verse was abrogated by an other Verse. So why should you
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
write it? (Or leave it in the Quran)?" 'Uthman said. "O son of my
^^^^^^^^
brother! I will not shift anything of it from its place."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
-------
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6. 60:
-------
Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:
I said to 'Uthman, "This Verse which is in Surat-al-Baqara:
"Those of you who die and leave widows behind...without turning them
out." has been abrogated by another Verse. Why then do you write it
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
(in the Quran)?" 'Uthman said. "Leave it (where it is), O the son of
my brother, for I will not shift anything of it (i.e. the Quran) from
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
its original position."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
My comments: If the previously mentioned verses which are alleged to be in
Quran as Sahih al-Bukhari claims, are abrogated, then why are they missing
in the Quran? How can we justify the last two traditions? More over, how
can something become abrogated after the death of Prophet?
If a verse is abrogated, there has to be an existing verse which
is better or equal than the previous one. This is what Quran testifies:
None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be
forgotten,
but We substitute something better or similar Do you
not know that
Allah has power over all things? (Quran 2:106)
Thus the abrogated and abrogating verses are always in pair.
As the above Sunni traditions confirm, the abrogated verse must be in
Quran. There are quite a few verses in present Quran which are clearly
stated in Tafaseer (of Sunni and Shia) that specific verses are abrogated
by such and such verses. The only abrogated verses which do not exist
in the Quran are those which Allah cause them to be "FORGOTTEN" (see
the above verse of Quran). Since the forgotten verses were not in the
mind of the prophet and the people, it is normal that these verses
are not in the present Quran, since nobody could remember them because
of Allah's will.
The traditions mentioned from Sihah Sittah claim that some verses in Quran
are missing and the companions not only * remember * them, but also recite
them in public. So it can not be abrogated since it is not forgotten nor
we have any similar verses (abrogating pairs) in Quran for them. Moreover,
the abrogation is only at the time of Prophet, and not after his death.
However some of the above traditions allege that some companions believed
that people after the death of Prophet have CHANGED the words of Quran,
however, THEY WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING, and THEY WILL CONTINUE RECITING
THEIR OWN VERSION OF QURAN. Abrogation can not be an answer for such
disputes.
Also al-Hakim An-Nisaboori in his book "Al-Mustadrak" in the section of
commentary on the Quran, part two, p224, reported that Ubai
Ibn Kaab (whom the Prophet called the leader of al-ansar), said
that the Messenger of God said to him:
Certainly the Almighty commanded me to read the Quran in
front of you, and he read "The unbelievers from the people
of the Book and the pagans will not change their way until
they see the evidence. Those who disbelieve among the people
of the scripture and the idolaters could not change until the
clear proof came unto them. A Messenger from Allah, reading
purified pages..." And of the very excellent part of it:
"Should Ibn Adam ask for a valley full of wealth and I grant it to
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
him, he would ask for another valley. And if I grant him
that, he
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
would ask for a third valley. Nothing would fill the abdomen
of Ibn
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Adam except the soil. God accepts the repentance of anyone
who
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
repents. The religion in the eyes of God is the Hanafiyah
(Islam)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
rather than Yahudiyya (Judaism) or Nasraniya (Christianity).
Whoever
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
does good, his goodness will not be denied."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim, section of commentary on the
Quran, v2, p224
Al-Hakim wrote: This is an authentic Hadith. al-Dhahabi also considered
it authentic in his commentary (on al-Mustadrak). al-Hakim reported that
Obei Ibn Kabb used to read:
"Those who disbelieved had set up in their hearts the
zealotry of the age of ignorance; and if you had had a
similar
zealotry, the Sacred Mosque would have been corrupted,
and God
[would have] brought down His peace of reassurance upon
His Messenger"
When al-Hakim said this is authentic according to the standards of the two
sheikhs (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)!!! and when al-Dhahabi also considered it
authentic in his Commentary on al-Mustadrak, v2, pp 225-226, and when
Muslim report similar to this from Abu Musa Ash'ari which I mentioned
earlier, then what will be the conclusion?
Those who claim that anyone who has recoded a tradition which implies the
incompleteness of Quran is Kafir, should first pass this verdict for
al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Hakim, because they testified that such absurd
traditions are authentic and have named their book "Sahih"! This is
while the author of al-Kafi never claimed that his book is all-authentic,
and mentioned that those traditions which contradict Quran should be
rejected.
Furthermore, let's suppose that al-Kulaini in his book, al-Kafi, had
recorded some traditions which may imply the incompleteness of Quran. Why
should all the Shia be accused of the belief in the incompleteness of the
Quran? al-Kulaini was not an infallible, and if a scholar like him makes
a mistake in recording a tradition which later found to be weak, why should
we attribute the mistake to millions of the Shia? If such an accusation is
possible and permissible, why should we not accuse all the Sunnis of the
belief of the incompleteness of the Quran because they are the followers
of Umar who was quoted by al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and Ibn
Mardawayh to have said that the Quran was incomplete, and that more than
200 verses were deleted? Why should Umar, Aisha, Abu Musa not be accused of
the same thing because of all of them stated the incompleteness of the
Quran?
We believe that the Quran as it is now is the entire Quran without any
subtraction or addition. It is the Quran which no false hood from the era
of pre revelation or post revelation entered it. It is a revelation from
the Mighty, the Praised. Allah promised that He will protect the Quran. He
said:
"Certainly We sent down the Reminder (i.e., Quran), and
certainly
we shall protect it" (Quran 15:9)
It is the Quran through which the Messenger and the Members of his House
commanded us to test the authenticity of every Hadith, and accept the
Hadith that agrees with the Quran and reject the Hadith which contradicts
the Quran. We believe that whoever says that the Quran is incomplete, or
was added is completely wrong. What was reported on this subject from Umar,
Abu Musa, Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad Hanbal, al-Hakim, and Kulaini is
completely rejected and absolutely unacceptable, if they want to mean the
incompleteness of Quran.
Despite the Sunni brothers who believe they have some authentic books,
Shi'a believe that only Quran is all-authentic, and all the traditions
attributed to prophet and Imams, are subject to check with well-
understood concepts in Quran.
Some of the references of this article:
- Sahih Bukhari printed by Muhammad Ali Subaih in Egypt
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic English version
- Sahih Muslim printed by Muhammad Ali Subaih in Egypt
- Sahih Muslim, English version
- Mustadrak by Hakim printed by al-Nasr in al-Riyadh 1335
- Musnad of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, printed Sader Beirute Lebenon 1969