Search the Community

Salaam, I've just read Allamah's view on distortion with the Qur'an and displacement of a couple of verses which has left me perplexed as to his definition of 'distortion'. Firstly, he states that the initial compilation was by Zayd ibn Thabit under the rule of Abu Bakr. Allamah believes that the Qur'an has not been distorted based on reason and credibility. The definition that he [or the article] gives of distortion is 'dropping a part of it, or adding something extraneous to it'. Now come to the displacement of verses part. He apparently believed that two verses in the Qur'an were displaced so as to disguise them. - 5:3 ["Today those who disbelieve have despaired of [harming] your religion; so fear them not, but fear Me! Today I perfected your religion for you, and completed My bounty upon you, and approved Islam as your religion..."] - 33:33 ["...People of the House, Allah only willeth to remove all impurity from you, and purify you such [thorough] purification."] How to reconcile between the two views? If verses have been displaced, surely that's 'giving a misleading or false account' of the events, meaning distortion? Secondly, if the falsifiers were going to displace the verses to hide the true meaning and get away with it, why not just exclude them from the mushaf altogether? Article link: https://www.al-Islam.org/shining-sun-memory-allamah-tabatabai-Sayyid-Muhammad-husayn-husayni-tehrani/7-historical-discourses#Qur'an-has-not-been-distorted Fi Amanillah

Very interesting research. Highly suggest you take a look. (wasalam) A Study of Sunni and Shii Traditions Concerning Tahrif Part 1 A Study of Sunni and Shii Traditions Concerning Tahrif Part 2 A Study of Sunni and Shii Traditions Concerning Tahrif Part 3 This research is unbiased, as can be seen by the reader.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani writes in his famous Tabaqat al Mudalliseen, in which he gives a list of those who committed tadlees (distortion) i.e. they narrated things in a way which was not the original wording and thus changed the meaning. In the first volume on the 24th page, he speaks about the 23rd mudallis he lists in his book : 23ق س محمد بن إسماعيل بن إبراهيم بن المغيرة البخاري الامام وصفه بذلك أبو عبد الله بن مندة في كلام له فقال فيه اخرج البخاري قال فلان وقال لنا فلان وهو تدليس ولم يوافق بن مندة على ذلك والذي يظهر أنه يقول فيما لم يسمع وفيما سمع لكن لا يكون على شرطه أو موقوفا قال لي أو قال لنا وقد عرفت ذلك بالاستقراء من صنيعه Muhammad ibn Isma'il ibn Ibrahim ibn al-Mugheera al-Bukhari, the Imam. Abu Abdullah ibn Munda accused him of this (distortion), saying: Al-Bukhari said fulan (somebody) said this and fulan (somebody) said that, and it was tadlees (distortion). In fact Ibn Mundah did not stop there. What has become apparent is that he would say what he didn't actually hear, or that he heard but it didn't fit his conditions, or he was narrating in a mawquf manner, saying "he said to me" or "they said to us". And I have come to know this through reading his book. What Ibn Hajar says is no surprise, because when you read his work you find that he clips out a lot of crucial information. A famous example is raziyat yawm al-Khamees (Calamity of Thursday) , where he clips out the name of Umar where Umar says his famous line "He is delirious, the Qur'an is sufficient for us" and there are actually many, many examples. والسلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته

They are changing and removing their hadiths from their books because we use it against them. The truth and path of ahlulbayt is in their books. It is quite clear. That is why there are so many editions and such. Here are many proofs showing this. http://www.al-islam.org/tahrif

(salam) Farid recently made a failed, veiled attempt to discredit Shaykh al-Sadooq (ra). But, due to the vigilance of our brothers, he crashed woefully. I did mention in that thread that a brother refuted him about a year ago on the honesty of al-Bukhaaree. Rather than address that, Farid turned to Shaykh al-Sadooq (ra), armed only with speculations! When I mentioned that brother's long-standing refutation of him, he rushed to the HCY Naasibi forum to add a "refutation". This is what he wrote: You see, Farid, you are completely missing the point here. The argument of that brother is that al-Bukhaaree took that hadeeth from al-Humaydee. Whether other hadeeth collectors also omitted the name or not is IRRELEVANT to this case. The crux of the argument here is whether al-Bukhaaree faithfully transmitted what al-Humaydee narrated to him or not! As you personally can see, all the narrators you have mentioned are NOT from al-Humaydee. They are from Sufyaan. BUT, this is NOT about Sufyaan. It is about al-Humaydee. Did al-Bukhaaree faithfully transmit from him or not? This is the hadeeth from Saheeh al-Bukhaaree (I am copying from that brother's refutation): 2110 حدثنا الحميدي حدثنا سفيان حدثنا عمرو بن دينار قال أخبرني طاوس أنه سمع ابن عباس رضي الله عنهما يقول بلغ عمر بن الخطاب أن فلانا باع خمرا فقال قاتل الله فلانا ألم يعلم أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال قاتل الله اليهود حرمت عليهم الشحوم فجملوها فباعوها The red part means "al-Humaydee narrated to us". Fine! So, al-Bukhaaree got the hadeeth from al-Humaydee. But, this same al-Humaydee has a book called Musnad al-Humaydee where his narrations are documented. Therefore, it is possible for us to verify what exactly he narrated to al-Bukhaaree. In Musnad al-Humaydee, this is how the hadeeth is recorded: 13 – حدثنا الحميدي ثنا سفيان ثنا عمرو بن دينار قال أخبرني طاوس سمع بن عباس يقول بلغ عمر بن الخطاب أن سمرة باع خمرا فقال قاتل الله سمرة ألم يعلم أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم قال : لعن الله اليهود حرمت عليهم الشحوم فجملوها فباعوها In other words, when al-Humaydee narrated the hadeeth, he mentioned Samrah. BUT, when al-Bukhaaree transmitted the same hadeeth with the same chain FROM HIM, he doctored it. That is the un-refuted argument of our brother. And please do not rush to HCY again for a pseudo-refutation. Address this point DIRECTLY, here.