Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله

Ayatollah Qazwini On Tahreef

Rate this topic


lotfilms

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

Don't just look at the intro and run away; actually see what Qazwini has to say.

One of these days can we have a serious discussion about tahreef and the narrations concerning it? We would be lying if we said there was no such hadith; there's many. And what if the narrations are authentic by our standards? What would that say about the Shia school?

Do the modern 'ulema who reject tahreef do so to appease Sunnis? Or because they view the hadiths as actually weak?

Any thoughts?

My own personal comments are perfectly summed up in these verse:

(from 0:30 onwards)

But i would like to hear the views of both sides on this issues; particularly the brothers who are knowledgeable in haditrh

was salam

Edited by lotfilms
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 154
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Forum Administrators

(salam)

"We did not make humans rulers, but we made the Qur'an the ruler over humans. This Qur'an is free from change but does not speak on its own accord, an interpreter is needed for this task." Nahjul Balagha

There was definitely a discussion about tahrif in early Shi'ism, but I think the idea of the preserved Qur'an was what had eventually become mainstream and widely accepted amongst our school. I don't think that this is based purely on taqiyya, as some may suggest, but rather that there is logically conclusive support for this position.

Those that believe in tahrif will for the following reasons:

1. 7, 10, or 12 different qira'at for the Qur'an, all with their own set of different words and some minor omitted or added content. However, this in my opinion does not account towards tahrif. First I'd like to clarify that this idea of the Qur'an being revealed in multiple qira'at is not Shi'ite - we genuinely believe in one Qur'an, and al-Khoei made it clear by rejecting the narrations that suggest different qira'at. Secondly I think the Hafs version, which is the most widely used one today, is the correct qira'a. The markings (fat'ha, kasra, dumma, etc.) were not in the Uthmanian copies; rather they were added by the companion of Imam Ali (as), Abu Aswad al-Du'li under his Caliphate, and that these were added for the 'ajam. This qira'a seems to have been what later became Hafs, and the other qira'at were inventions. Khoei in his book al-Bayaan fee Tafsir al-Qur'an breaks down those other qira'at. Plus, for one to say that the Qur'an was added to or taken away from, one must disprove all the self-confirming verses in the Qur'an, and prove that these were all fabrications, which there is no evidence for.

2. In one of the works of Fadhl ibn Shadhan actually alleges that the Qur'an has been changed, but this claim itself is not specific, it is vague, and there is much question if the work can even be traced to Shadhan.

3. al-Mufid gives two positions in two different books about the Qur'an. The first is that the Qur'an is the same, except for the order of its surahs, and the second is that it is fabricated. The latter work is not found in Najashi's list of collections of his time, and al-Khoei declared this work to have been a fabrication attributed to al-Mufid because of this. Even if it was truly al-Mufid's book, it was the older of the two, and Mufid had changed his mind therefore.

4. There is a hadith in al-Kafi about 17,000 ayat in the Qur'an, which apparently was declared muwathaq by al-Majlisi. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can comment on this one.

5. There are various ahadith, both Sunni and Shi'a, about added words to the Qur'an. For example, there is a narration from Abdullah ibn Mas'ud that the ayah on mut'a actually had the words "for a declared time period" or something added to the end of the verse. There is also a Shi'i hadith from Imam as-Sadiq (as) where he adds the word muhaddath to an ayah that does not have it. However, it seems that there are a few traditions in both Sunni and Shi'i Islam of saying extra words on certain verses that are not actually from the Qur'an. For example, Sunnis say "Ameen" after Fatiha, and Shi'as say "al-hamdulilahi rabb al-'alameen". Also, in verse 5:67, ibn Mas'ud also said that they would sometimes actually say the word Ali in the verse, as the verse was concerning him at ghadir.

Anyway, the issue is of course debatable, but usually revolving around those 5 points. The ahadith that flat out say that the present Qur'an is fabricated are usually contributed by weak narrators. Let me end this post with a quote from Shaykh Saduq, one of our earliest scholars:

"Our belief is that the Qur’an 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 Suras 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."

Edited by Qa'im
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

WOW ! What a proof of Tahreef. Had the Nasibi who prepared this video seen what their own sources have to say about the verse that is being discussed, he might not have bothered to prepare this video. Using the same sort of lanfuage that has been used in the vedio, one of the greatest priests of Nasibi cult namely Imam Abu Ishaq Thalabi records in Al-Kashf al-Bayan fi Tafsir al Quran:

Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdullah al-Kaeni from Abu al-Hassan bin Uthman bin al-Hassan al-Nusaibi from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin al-Hussain bin Saleh al-Subaei from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Saeed from Ahmad bin Maytham bin Abi Naeem from Abu Janad al-Saloli from al-Amash from Abu Wael that he said: ‘I read in Abdullah ibn Masud's Mushaf:

{ Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran and descendants of Muhammad above the nations.}’

I would wait for these Nawasib to pass edict of Kufr against Abdullah Ibn Masood!

And thats not the end of the story, the above cited reference has caused so many problems to the Nasibi cult that they have made Tahreef in 'Tafsir Thalabi' itself in order to hide the Tahreef pointed out by a Sahabi in Quran and hence you may no longer find this reference in Tafsir Thalabi. But, this gonna hurt the Nawasib badly i.e. another pop of Nasibi world namely Imam Bahaqi in his book Lubab al-Ansab wa al-Alqab wa al-Aqab, Volume 1 page 10 quoted the very reference from Tafsir Thalabi:

وذكر الثعلبي في تفسيره عن الأعمش عن أبي وائل أنه قال: قرأت في مصحف عبد الله بن مسعود وآل إبراهيم وآل عمران وآل محمد على العالمين

Thalabi recorded in his Tafsir from al-Amash from Abi Wael that he said: 'I read in Abullah ibn Masud's book: 'The family of Abraham, and the family of Imran and the family of Muhammad above all people''

Edited by B-N
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

4. There is a hadith in al-Kafi about 17,000 ayat in the Qur'an, which apparently was declared muwathaq by al-Majlisi. Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can comment on this one.

عَلِيُّ بْنُ الْحَكَمِ عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ إِنَّ الْقُرْآنَ الَّذِي جَاءَ بِهِ جَبْرَئِيلُ ع إِلَى مُحَمَّدٍ ص سَبْعَةَ عَشَرَ أَلْفَ آيَةٍ

“Aboo ‘Abd Allah (as), has said, ‘The Holy Quran that Jibra'eel brought to Muhammad (SAWAS) had seventeen thousand verses (17,000).’”

  • Source:
  • Al-Kulaynee, Al-Kaafi, vol. 2, pg. 634, hadeeth # 28
    Grading:
  • Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Muwaththaq (Reliable)
    --> Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 12, pg. 525
  • Al-Majlisi I (Majlisi's Father) said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (Authentic)
    --> RawDah Al-Muttaqoon, vol. 10, pg. 21
  • Hoor Al-'Aamilee said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (authentic)
    --> Al-Fuwaa-id Al-Toosiyyah, topic # 96, pg. 483

Current Qur'aan has 6,236 verses.

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Úóáöíõø Èúäõ ÇáúÍóßóãö Úóäú åöÔóÇãö Èúäö ÓóÇáöãò Úóäú ÃóÈöí ÚóÈúÏö Çááóøåö Ú ÞóÇáó Åöäóø ÇáúÞõÑúÂäó ÇáóøÐöí ÌóÇÁó Èöåö ÌóÈúÑóÆöíáõ Ú Åöáóì ãõÍóãóøÏò Õ ÓóÈúÚóÉó ÚóÔóÑó ÃóáúÝó ÂíóÉò

“Abu ‘Abd Allah (as), has said, ‘The Holy Quran that Jibra'eel brought to Muhammad (SAWAS) had seventeen thousand verses (17,000).’”

  • Source:
  • Al-Kulaynee, Al-Kaafi, vol. 2, pg. 634, hadeeth # 28
    Grading:
  • Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Muwaththaq (Reliable)
    --> Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 12, pg. 525
  • Al-Majlisi I (Majlisi's Father) said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (Authentic)
    --> RawDah Al-Muttaqoon, vol. 10, pg. 21
  • Hoor Al-'Aamilee said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (authentic)
    --> Al-Fuwaa-id Al-Toosiyyah, topic # 96, pg. 483

And, what about the hadith that Aisha said the goat ate the verse?

And, what about Aisha claiming that there were more verses in surah 33?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Ubayy ibn Ka'b and Aisha declare that approximately two-thirds of Surah 33 is missing. Both passages are taken from Abu Ubaid's Kitab Fada'il-al-Qur'an.

Ibn Abi Maryam related to us from Ibn Luhai'a from Abu'l-Aswad from Urwa b. az-Zubair from A'isha who said, "Surat al-Ahzab (xxxiii) used to be recited in the time of the Prophet with two hundred verses, but when Uthman wrote out the codices he was unable to procure more of it than there is in it today."

Isma'il b. Ibrahim and Isma'i b. Ja'far related to us from al-Mubarak b. Fadala from Asim b. Abi'n-Nujud from Zirr b. Hubaish who said--Ubai b. Ka'b said to me, "O Zirr, how many verses did you count (or how many verses did you read) in Surat al-Ahzab?" "Seventy-two or seventy-three," I answered. Said he, "Yet it used to be equal to Surat al-Baqara (ii), and we used to read in it the verse of Stoning."

Edited by aladdin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sunan Ibn Majah, Book of Nikah, Hadith # 1934)

Narrated Aisha 'The verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah (SAWW.) expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

Ibn Abi Maryam related to us from Ibn Luhai'a from Abu'l-Aswad from Urwa b. az-Zubair from A'isha who said, "Surat al-Ahzab (xxxiii) used to be recited in the time of the Prophet with two hundred verses, but when Uthman wrote out the codices he was unable to procure more of it than there is in it today."

Here is this hadeeth:

قال‏:‏ حدثنا ابن أبي مريم عن [أبي لهيعة [ ابن لهيعة عن أبي الأسود عن عروة بن الزبير بن عائشة قالت‏:‏ كانت سورة الأحزاب تقرأ في زمن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم مائتي آية فلما كتب عثمان المصاحف لم نقدر منها إلا ما هو الآن‏.‏

  • Source:
  • Al-SuyooTee, Al-Itiqaan fee 'Uloom Al-Qur'aan, vol. 2, section 47, pg. 41

If I am correct, I believe Abee Luhay'ah / 'Abd Allaah bin Luhay'ah is Da'eef. Lord Botta can double check if I am right or wrong.

I think this topic is mainly about Shee'ah hadeeth and not Sunnee hadeeth. I would love for you to quote some Shee'ah hadeeth for once, aladdin. You seem to quote sunnee hadeeth left and right, but when it comes to shee'ah hadeeth, you rarely if ever quote.

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think this topic is mainly about Shee'ah hadeeth and not Sunnee hadeeth. I would love for you to quote some Shee'ah hadeeth for once, aladdin. You seem to quote sunnee hadeeth left and right, but when it comes to shee'ah hadeeth, you rarely if ever quote.

LOL!

We are back to ilum al-rijal which is trash and back to Lord Botta.

1. Why would a Sunni scholar include a hadith on Tahrif al-Quran in his collection?

2. What was his motive for including this hadith?

3. I don't think the topic is about Shia and/or Sunni, am I correct in assuming the topic is about Tahrif al-Quran?

4. Is the topic about Shia hadiths, correct me if I am wrong?

5. And, I have never seen you to come to the defense of the Shias?

6. But, why do you always come against the Shias, and include Lord Botta as your expert witness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

Sunan Ibn Majah, Book of Nikah, Hadith # 1934)

Narrated Aisha 'The verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah (SAWW.) expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper."

Here is this hadeeth:

حدثنا أبو سلمة يحيى بن خلف حدثنا عبد الأعلى عن محمد بن إسحق عن عبد الله بن أبي بكر عن عمرة عن عائشة و عن عبد الرحمن بن القاسم عن أبيه عن عائشة قالت لقد نزلت آية الرجم ورضاعة الكبير عشرا ولقد كان في صحيفة تحت سريري فلما مات رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتشاغلنا بموته دخل داجن فأكلها

  • Source:
  • Ibn Maajah, Sunan, vol. 4, pg. 444, hadeeth # 1944
    Grading:
  • Al-Albaani said this hadeeth is Hasan
    --> SaHeeH wa Da'eef Sunan Ibn Maajah, hadeeth # 1944

1. Why would a Sunni scholar include a hadith on Tahrif al-Quran in his collection?

Brother, we have hadeeth upon hadeeth and scholars upon scholars who talks about taHreef in the Qur'aan. Get your facts straight before a Sunnee who is knowledgeable would completely murder you in this topic.

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Here is this hadeeth:

ÍÏËäÇ ÃÈæ ÓáãÉ íÍíì Èä ÎáÝ ÍÏËäÇ ÚÈÏ ÇáÃÚáì Úä ãÍãÏ Èä ÅÓÍÞ Úä ÚÈÏ Çááå Èä ÃÈí ÈßÑ Úä ÚãÑÉ Úä ÚÇÆÔÉ æ Úä ÚÈÏ ÇáÑÍãä Èä ÇáÞÇÓã Úä ÃÈíå Úä ÚÇÆÔÉ ÞÇáÊ áÞÏ äÒáÊ ÂíÉ ÇáÑÌã æÑÖÇÚÉ ÇáßÈíÑ ÚÔÑÇ æáÞÏ ßÇä Ýí ÕÍíÝÉ ÊÍÊ ÓÑíÑí ÝáãÇ ãÇÊ ÑÓæá Çááå Õáì Çááå Úáíå æÓáã æÊÔÇÛáäÇ ÈãæÊå ÏÎá ÏÇÌä ÝÃßáåÇ

  • Source:
  • Ibn Maajah, Sunan, vol. 4, pg. 444, hadeeth # 1944
    Grading:
  • Al-Albaani said this hadeeth is Hasan
    --> SaHeeH wa Da'eef Sunan Ibn Maajah, hadeeth # 1944

1. So, al-Albani has graded this hadith as Hasan, and has agreed that there is Tarif in al-Quran?

2. That the Quran is not complete and has missing verses in it?

Current Qur'aan has 6,236 verses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

Brother Aladdin, the video was from Ayatullaah Qazweenee, not from Albaanee. So it makes no sense that we are talking about sunnee perspectives on this issue. Lotfilms clearly took out a video of a shee'ah scholar. The video of the sunnee leading that salaah is because none of our own scholars can recite the quraan properly with proper tajweed. So don't use that as an excuse. If he wanted a sunnee perspective, then he would have quoted some ahaadeeth or a video from them.

Back to the topic at hand, it is important to see the opinions of the shee'ah scholars on this because Khoei says that if there are SaHeeH hadeeth on something and it goes against the Quraan, then you take the SaHeeH hadeeth. So if this is a SaHeeH hadeeth according to Hurr al-'Aamilee and Majlisee's father, then wouldn't the shee'ah opinion be FOR taHreef?

It truly is sad to see that we still don't have a decisive answer on this. This is a matter of aqeedah and not practice. If this is flawed, then the religion is flawed.

I want to see a shee'ah scholar now with a video coming out and saying takfeer against those who believe the Quraan is changed. Another sad tragedy is that our ulamaa are not firm in their positions to the point they are willing to say takfeer on this. (because this is aqeedah and not practice remember)

It is also funny how when there are ahaadeeth that go against the shee'ah aqeedah we say it is under taqiyyah? What about this one? WOOOOW! The double standard of our scholars. If this is against the aqeedah of Shee'ah Islaam (according to verses from the Quraan), then they should put it under that category as well, right? But "cherrypicking" is a very popular hobby amongst our ulamaa' and so I understand why they do these things.

(salam)

Edited by Abu Abdullaah
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Brother Aladdin, the post was made from Ayatullaah Qazweenee not from Albaanee. So it makes no sense that we are talking about sunnee perspectives on this issue.

I want to see a shee'ah scholar now with a video coming out and saying takfeer against those who believe the Quraan is changed. Another sad part about what is going on with the scholarship of Shee'ah Islaam. No firmness in their stands.

From both side of the isles, from both Sunni and Shia, the ulemas of both of them have claimed that there has been tahrif in the Quran. This is no new revelation on anybody's part.

Below is a hadith in which al-Albani has agreed that the Quran contains missing verses:

(salam)

(bismillah)

Here is this hadeeth:

حدثنا أبو سلمة يحيى بن خلف حدثنا عبد الأعلى عن محمد بن إسحق عن عبد الله بن أبي بكر عن عمرة عن عائشة و عن عبد الرحمن بن القاسم عن أبيه عن عائشة قالت لقد نزلت آية الرجم ورضاعة الكبير عشرا ولقد كان في صحيفة تحت سريري فلما مات رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتشاغلنا بموته دخل داجن فأكلها

  • Source:
  • Ibn Maajah, Sunan, vol. 4, pg. 444, hadeeth # 1944
    Grading:
  • Al-Albaani said this hadeeth is Hasan
    --> SaHeeH wa Da'eef Sunan Ibn Maajah, hadeeth # 1944

Edited by aladdin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

From both side of the isles, from both Sunni and Shia, the ulemas of both of them have claimed that there has been tahrif in the Quran. This is no new revelation on anybody's part.

These are just hadeeth. Name one respected 'ulemaa of the Sunnee who has said outrightly that there is taHreef to the Qur'aan. Just one respected 'ulemaa, that is all I am asking.

(salam)

Edited by Nader Zaveri
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

These are just hadeeth. Name one respected 'ulemaa of the Sunnee who has said outrightly that there is taHreef to the Qur'aan. Just one respected 'ulemaa, that is all I am asking.

1. Do you ever read what you post?

2. Do your ever read the text (matn) of what you post?

3. You have just posted that al-Albani has agreed that the Holy Quran has missing verses in it, do you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

1. Do you ever read what you post?

2. Do your ever read the text (matn) of what you post?

3. You have just posted that al-Albani has agreed that the Holy Quran has missing verses in it, do you agree?

No he doesn't agree, first off you don't know Al-Albaani. He is all about only taking SaHeeH hadeeth. Also, I am sure they reconcile this hadeeth with something, I just haven't found their explanation. I am sure Lord Botta can shed some light on what the scholars say about this hadeeth. But like I said. Name one RESPECTED Sunnee 'Ulemaa who has said that there has been taHreef of the Qur'aan.

(salam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

So are you telling me you believe in the Quraan being TaHreefed?

Yes or No?

I want an answer.

Salam brother,

I don't believe that there has been Tahrif in the Holy Quran.

The below link, summarizes my views:

http://www.lankarani.org/eng/mes/024.php

However, there are Sunnis and Shias who believe as such.

There are some Shias who believe that certain verses were left out, which proved the imamate (as). The Companions intentionally left them out, when they compiled the Quran. However, those who believe as such, believe what is left in the Quran, doesn't have tahrif in it.

It like almost all the hadiths were destroyed and burned by the first three caliphs, to ensure that no traces are left for the wilayah of imam Ali (as), so they destroyed and burned all the hadiths. For this reason the hadiths were re-complied 200-300 years after the death of rasool Allah Mohammad (pbuh).

Of course, they couldn't burn and destroy the complete Quran.

This is what Ayatollah Qazwini is saying that the verse is incomplete, which leaves out the wilayah of imam Ali (as), and the immate (as). And, of course what is left in the verse has no tahrif in it.

No he doesn't agree, first off you don't know Al-Albaani. He is all about only taking SaHeeH hadeeth. Also, I am sure they reconcile this hadeeth with something, I just haven't found their explanation. I am sure Lord Botta can shed some light on what the scholars say about this hadeeth. But like I said. Name one RESPECTED Sunnee 'Ulemaa who has said that there has been taHreef of the Qur'aan.

It looks like your complete emaan has been shaken!

Edited by aladdin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

(bismillah)

This is what Ayatollah Qazwini is saying that the verse is incomplete, which leaves out the wilayah of imam Ali (as), and the immate (as).

Which would entail that there has been some sort of taHreef (distortion) to the current Qur'aan we have in our possessions.

(salam)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Which would entail that there has been some sort of taHreef (distortion) to the current Qur'aan we have in our possessions.

Read the post carefully what I have written, as you are not a very good reader, but one who quotes right and left.

As I have written above earlier, It looks like your complete emaan has been shaken!

I am sure that your Lord Botta will come to rescue you and put the emaan back into you!

WOW ! What a proof of Tahreef. Had the Nasibi who prepared this video seen what their own sources have to say about the verse that is being discussed, he might not have bothered to prepare this video. Using the same sort of lanfuage that has been used in the vedio, one of the greatest priests of Nasibi cult namely Imam Abu Ishaq Thalabi records in Al-Kashf al-Bayan fi Tafsir al Quran:

Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdullah al-Kaeni from Abu al-Hassan bin Uthman bin al-Hassan al-Nusaibi from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin al-Hussain bin Saleh al-Subaei from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Saeed from Ahmad bin Maytham bin Abi Naeem from Abu Janad al-Saloli from al-Amash from Abu Wael that he said: ‘I read in Abdullah ibn Masud's Mushaf:

{ Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran and descendants of Muhammad above the nations.}’

I would wait for these Nawasib to pass edict of Kufr against Abdullah Ibn Masood!

And thats not the end of the story, the above cited reference has caused so many problems to the Nasibi cult that they have made Tahreef in 'Tafsir Thalabi' itself in order to hide the Tahreef pointed out by a Sahabi in Quran and hence you may no longer find this reference in Tafsir Thalabi. But, this gonna hurt the Nawasib badly i.e. another pop of Nasibi world namely Imam Bahaqi in his book Lubab al-Ansab wa al-Alqab wa al-Aqab, Volume 1 page 10 quoted the very reference from Tafsir Thalabi:

æÐßÑ ÇáËÚáÈí Ýí ÊÝÓíÑå Úä ÇáÃÚãÔ Úä ÃÈí æÇÆá Ãäå ÞÇá: ÞÑÃÊ Ýí ãÕÍÝ ÚÈÏ Çááå Èä ãÓÚæÏ æÂá ÅÈÑÇåíã æÂá ÚãÑÇä æÂá ãÍãÏ Úáì ÇáÚÇáãíä

Thalabi recorded in his Tafsir from al-Amash from Abi Wael that he said: 'I read in Abullah ibn Masud's book: 'The family of Abraham, and the family of Imran and the family of Muhammad above all people''

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No he doesn't agree, first off you don't know Al-Albaani. He is all about only taking SaHeeH hadeeth. Also, I am sure they reconcile this hadeeth with something, I just haven't found their explanation. I am sure Lord Botta can shed some light on what the scholars say about this hadeeth. But like I said. Name one RESPECTED Sunnee 'Ulemaa who has said that there has been taHreef of the Qur'aan.

Al-Albani commented about similar hadiths in Al-Silsila Al-Saheeha under hadith # 2913:

Al-Bayhaqi said: "In this (hadith) and the one before it evidence that the ruling of stoning is still applicable, with an abrogated reading, and I know no difference of opinion about this."

...

If you understand what I have stated previously, regarding the consensus of the Companions about these clear verses about the abrogation of verses, you will realize that the Companions are truly just and are faithful to knowledge, and are not fazed by their desires, unlike innovators that don't conform to religious rulings, and use their intellect to interpret them. And these hadiths don't contradict the hadith of Ibn Abbas when asked if the Prophet (pbuh) left anything, he said, "He only left what is in between the two covers." For the meaning of this is the recited Qur'an.

...

Al-Albani then quotes Ibn Hajar who states that there were many verses revealed in the Qur'an but were abrogated in recitation, but the laws are still to be applied, then he gave a list of these, like the hadith of Al-Rajm, the length of Suratul Ahzab, the length of Surat Bara'a, and the hadith of Anas about the verse revealed regarding those that died at Bi'r Al-Ma'oona.

...and yes, you are correct, Sunnis don't say that the Qur'an was tampered with. The only evidences for this are hadiths that speak of hadiths of abrogation, which scholars see it as just that, and have nothing to do with fabrications.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd also like to add that I'm not familiar with any Shia scholar saying that there are additions to the Qur'an. However, some seem to hold others views like some verses were removed, or the names of Ahlul Bayt were removed, or in some cases that the position of the verses were tampered with.

Here, Al-Milani argues that some verses like Ayatul Mawada and Ayatul Tatheer should have been in different places:

http://www.shiaweb.org/books/adam_tahrif/pa2.html

Scroll down towards the end of the page.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

...and yes, you are correct, Sunnis don't say that the Qur'an was tampered with. The only evidences for this are hadiths that speak of hadiths of abrogation, which scholars see it as just that, and have nothing to do with fabrications.

Here comes Lord Botta to the rescue!

First came the games of ilum al-hadiths, then came the games of ilum al-rijal, now the new game is some parts of the matn (text) of the hadith is accepted as sahih, and at same time other parts of the same hadith are rejected.

Sunan Ibn Majah, Book of Nikah, Hadith # 1934)

Narrated Aisha 'The verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah (SAWW.) expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper."

These are just hadeeth. Name one respected 'ulemaa of the Sunnee who has said outrightly that there is taHreef to the Qur'aan. Just one respected 'ulemaa, that is all I am asking.

What do you mean, "these are just hadeeth". Isn't hadith = Sunnah of Prophet = Holy Quran?

Isn't the Sunnah of the Prophet above the opinions of the respected ulemas?

I'd also like to add that I'm not familiar with any Shia scholar saying that there are additions to the Qur'an. However, some seem to hold others views like some verses were removed, or the names of Ahlul Bayt were removed, or in some cases that the position of the verses were tampered with.

Thanks for agreeing with my above post number 20.

Edited by aladdin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

And these hadiths don't contradict the hadith of Ibn Abbas when asked if the Prophet (pbuh) left anything, he said, "He only left what is in between the two covers." For the meaning of this is the recited Qur'an.

When the Prophet (pbuh) died, there was no such Quran between the two covers. We are back to the matn of the hadith and common sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Aaprt from those two sources, these two Sunni books also contain the very fact.

Hasakani al-Hanafi records in Shawahid al-Tanzil, Volume 1 page 152:

Úä ÔÞíÞ ÞÇá : ÞÑÃÊ Ýí ãÕÍÝ ÚÈÏ Çááå æåæ ÇÈä ãÓÚæÏ { Çä Çááå ÇÕØÝì ÂÏã æäæÍÇ æÂá ÅÈÑÇåíã æÂá ÚãÑÇä æÂá ãÍãÏ Úáì ÇáÚÇáãíä}

Shaqiq said: ‘I read in Abdullah ibn Masud's Mushaf ‘{Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran and descendants of Muhammad above the nations.}’

Imam Abu Hayan Andlasi also records in Tafsir Bahar al-Muheet, Volume 2 page 203:

æÞÑà ÚÈÏ Çááå : æÂá ãÍãÏ Úáì ÇáÚÇáãíä

Abdullah used to recite: 'The descendants of Muhammad above all people'

===============

I would like to know Lord Boota's edict against Ibn Abbas for adhering to the following beliefs with respect to two verses of Holy Quran:

We read in Quran:

[shakir 13:31] And even if there were a Quran with which the mountains were made to pass away, or the earth were travelled over with it, or the dead were made to speak thereby; nay! the commandment is wholly Allah's, Have not yet those who believe known that if Allah please He would certainly guide all the people? And (as for) those who disbelieve, there will not cease to afflict them because of what they do a repelling calamity, or it will alight close by their abodes, until the promise of Allah comes about; surely Allah will not fail in (His) promise

31. WALAW ANNA QUR-ANAN SUYYIRAT BIHI ALJIBALU AW QUTTIAAAT BIHI AL-ARDU AW KULLIMA BIHI ALMAWTA BAL LILLAHI AL-AMRU JAMEEAAAN AFALAM YAY-ASI ALLATHEENA AMANOO AN LAW YASHAO ALLAHU LAHADA ALNNASA JAMEEAAAN WALA YAZALU ALLATHEENA KAFAROO TUSEEBUHUM BIMA SANAAAOO QARIAAATUN AW TAHULLU QAREEBAN MIN DARIHIM HATTA YA/TIYA WAAADU ALLAHI INNA ALLAHA LA YUKHLIFU ALMEEAAADA

Imam of Ahle Sunnah Ibn Hajar Asqalani writes in his commentary of Sahih Bukhari:

æÑæì ÇáØÈÑí æÚÈÏ Èä ÍãíÏ ÈÅÓäÇÏ ÕÍíÍ ßáåã ãä ÑÌÇá ÇáÈÎÇÑí Úä ÇÈä ÚÈÇÓ Ãäå ßÇä íÞÑÄåÇ þ"þ ÃÝáã íÊÈíä þ"þ æíÞæáþ:þ ßÊÈåÇ ÇáßÇÊÈ æåæ äÇÚÓ

“And Tabari and Abd bin Hamid narrated with a Sahih chain containing all the narrators from the rijal of Bukhari, from Ibn Abbas that he recited “AFALAM YATBAIN” and said that the writer had written it [YAY-ASI] when he was drowsy.”

Then we read in Tafseer Ibn Abi Hatim, Volume 8 page 2595:

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓíä ¡ ËäÇ äÕÑ Èä Úáí ¡ ÃÎÈÑäí ÃÈí ¡ Úä ÔÈá Èä ÚÈÇÏ ¡ Úä ÞíÓ Èä ÓÚÏ ¡ Úä ÚØÇÁ ¡ Úä ÇÈä ÚÈÇÓ : ( Çááå äæÑ ÇáÓãæÇÊ æÇáÃÑÖ ãËá äæÑå ) ÞÇá : åí ÎØà ãä ÇáßÇÊÈ ¡ åæ ÃÚÙã ãä Ãä íßæä äæÑå ãËá äæÑ ÇáãÔßÇÉ ÞÇá : ãËá äæÑ ÇáãÄãä ßãÔßÇÉ

Ali bin al-Hussain narrated from Nasr bin Ali from his father from Shebl bin Abaad from Qays bin Saad from Atta from Ibn Abbas ‘{Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth; a likeness of His light is as a niche}’. He said: ‘This is a mistake by the scribe, He (Allah) is greater than to be his light as a niche, He said (that its actualy): ‘{a likeness of the believer's light is as a niche}’’.

According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s Taqrib al-Tahdib Ali bin al-Hussain bin Ibrahim al-Ameri is ‘Seduq’ and Nasr bin Ali al-Jahdhami is ‘Thiqah Thabt’ where as Ali bin Nasr, Shebl bin Abbad, Qays bin Saad al-Makki and Atta bin Rabah are ‘Thiqah’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(salam)

Theres an amazing book called: (The Prolegomena to the Quran - Al-Bayan fi tafsir al-Qur'an) by Sayed Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei. He goes in depth about the issue of Tahreef in the Quran.

Wa Salam.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Sallamun Alaykum

Dear brothers and sisters

this subject of Tahrif has been discussed in depth by our shia scholars and researchers via their books. personally i know more than a handful of recent works, in english there are a few also such as the book genuiness of the holy quran i think by agha puya and quranic sciences by abbas jaffer and masuma jaffer (im speaking out of memory) and sayed khoes albayan which was translated to english called prolegomena to the holy quran ot something like that and maybe there are some others in english i do not know of. secondaly i would like to add people often dont relize that the word tahrif has many diffarant meanings especially i from my experience with wahabis and in the hcy forum when i was discussing with them have seen that they view tahrif only in one manner so anyone who says tahrif they immediatly do takfeer of him without understanding what he means by tahreef.

Thirdly the beleif in tahrif has been legalised by those who beleive that the qira'at are legitamate and wahabis from my expereince beleive in the qira'at.

these are my points inshallah it was helpful.

ws wr wb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I'd also like to add that I'm not familiar with any Shia scholar saying that there are additions to the Qur'an. However, some seem to hold others views like some verses were removed, or the names of Ahlul Bayt were removed, or in some cases that the position of the verses were tampered with.

1. What is the name of the first Surah, which was revealed?

2. And, which category of tahrif would this come under?

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.

What is the name of the last chapter of the Holy Quran?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imam of Ahle Sunnah Ibn Hajar Asqalani writes in his commentary of Sahih Bukhari:

æÑæì ÇáØÈÑí æÚÈÏ Èä ÍãíÏ ÈÅÓäÇÏ ÕÍíÍ ßáåã ãä ÑÌÇá ÇáÈÎÇÑí Úä ÇÈä ÚÈÇÓ Ãäå ßÇä íÞÑÄåÇ þ"þ ÃÝáã íÊÈíä þ"þ æíÞæáþ:þ ßÊÈåÇ ÇáßÇÊÈ æåæ äÇÚÓ

“And Tabari and Abd bin Hamid narrated with a Sahih chain containing all the narrators from the rijal of Bukhari, from Ibn Abbas that he recited “AFALAM YATBAIN” and said that the writer had written it [YAY-ASI] when he was drowsy.”

This is a strange one really. Ibn Hajar himself weakens Hanthala in Taqreebul Tahtheeb. The Hanthala in question is Hanthala bin Abdullah Al-Sadoosi.

--------------

Then we read in Tafseer Ibn Abi Hatim, Volume 8 page 2595:

ÍÏËäÇ Úáí Èä ÇáÍÓíä ¡ ËäÇ äÕÑ Èä Úáí ¡ ÃÎÈÑäí ÃÈí ¡ Úä ÔÈá Èä ÚÈÇÏ ¡ Úä ÞíÓ Èä ÓÚÏ ¡ Úä ÚØÇÁ ¡ Úä ÇÈä ÚÈÇÓ : ( Çááå äæÑ ÇáÓãæÇÊ æÇáÃÑÖ ãËá äæÑå ) ÞÇá : åí ÎØà ãä ÇáßÇÊÈ ¡ åæ ÃÚÙã ãä Ãä íßæä äæÑå ãËá äæÑ ÇáãÔßÇÉ ÞÇá : ãËá äæÑ ÇáãÄãä ßãÔßÇÉ

Ali bin al-Hussain narrated from Nasr bin Ali from his father from Shebl bin Abaad from Qays bin Saad from Atta from Ibn Abbas ‘{Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth; a likeness of His light is as a niche}’. He said: ‘This is a mistake by the scribe, He (Allah) is greater than to be his light as a niche, He said (that its actualy): ‘{a likeness of the believer's light is as a niche}’’.

According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s Taqrib al-Tahdib Ali bin al-Hussain bin Ibrahim al-Ameri is ‘Seduq’ and Nasr bin Ali al-Jahdhami is ‘Thiqah Thabt’ where as Ali bin Nasr, Shebl bin Abbad, Qays bin Saad al-Makki and Atta bin Rabah are ‘Thiqah’.

I'd need to look deeper into this narration. I find it really strange since it is mutawatir that Ibn Abbas would read this as ( Çááå äæÑ ÇáÓãæÇÊ æÇáÃÑÖ ãËá äæÑå ) in like eight narrations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

Here is some more juice!

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

(bismillah)

(salam)

First off, as i've said previously on this forum, i don't care about Sunni hadiths and i don't really want people quoting them in this topic. Let us start with ourselves first then move on.

3. I don't think the topic is about Shia and/or Sunni, am I correct in assuming the topic is about Tahrif al-Quran?

4. Is the topic about Shia hadiths, correct me if I am wrong?

I would prefer to stick to Shia hadiths; at least for now.

1. 7, 10, or 12 different qira'at for the Qur'an, all with their own set of different words and some minor omitted or added content.

Yea, but usually the different readings don't change the meanings much. The tahreef our hadiths refer to have a HUGE impact.

Let me end this post with a quote from Shaykh Saduq, one of our earliest scholars:

"Our belief is that the Qur’an 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 Suras 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."

http://www.al-milani.net/fatawa/?id=24

عَلِيُّ بْنُ الْحَكَمِ عَنْ هِشَامِ بْنِ سَالِمٍ عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللَّهِ ع قَالَ إِنَّ الْقُرْآنَ الَّذِي جَاءَ بِهِ جَبْرَئِيلُ ع إِلَى مُحَمَّدٍ ص سَبْعَةَ عَشَرَ أَلْفَ آيَةٍ

“Aboo ‘Abd Allah (as), has said, ‘The Holy Quran that Jibra'eel brought to Muhammad (SAWAS) had seventeen thousand verses (17,000).’”

  • Source:
  • Al-Kulaynee, Al-Kaafi, vol. 2, pg. 634, hadeeth # 28
    Grading:
  • Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Muwaththaq (Reliable)
    --> Mir'aat Al-'Uqool, vol. 12, pg. 525
  • Al-Majlisi I (Majlisi's Father) said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (Authentic)
    --> RawDah Al-Muttaqoon, vol. 10, pg. 21
  • Hoor Al-'Aamilee said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (authentic)
    --> Al-Fuwaa-id Al-Toosiyyah, topic # 96, pg. 483

Current Qur'aan has 6,236 verses.

Yea, but does this necessarily indicate that verses were taken out? Or does it mean that the verses may be numbered differently now. For example, the verse on loans:

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا تَدَايَنتُم بِدَيْنٍ إِلَىٰ أَجَلٍ مُّسَمًّى فَاكْتُبُوهُ ۚ وَلْيَكْتُب بَّيْنَكُمْ كَاتِبٌ بِالْعَدْلِ ۚ وَلَا يَأْبَ كَاتِبٌ أَن يَكْتُبَ كَمَا عَلَّمَهُ اللَّـهُ ۚ فَلْيَكْتُبْ وَلْيُمْلِلِ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ الْحَقُّ وَلْيَتَّقِ اللَّـهَ رَبَّهُ وَلَا يَبْخَسْ مِنْهُ شَيْئًا ۚ فَإِن كَانَ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِ الْحَقُّ سَفِيهًا أَوْ ضَعِيفًا أَوْ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُ أَن يُمِلَّ هُوَ فَلْيُمْلِلْ وَلِيُّهُ بِالْعَدْلِ ۚ وَاسْتَشْهِدُوا شَهِيدَيْنِ مِن رِّجَالِكُمْ ۖ فَإِن لَّمْ يَكُونَا رَجُلَيْنِ فَرَجُلٌ وَامْرَأَتَانِ مِمَّن تَرْضَوْنَ مِنَ الشُّهَدَاءِ أَن تَضِلَّ إِحْدَاهُمَا فَتُذَكِّرَ إِحْدَاهُمَا الْأُخْرَىٰ ۚ وَلَا يَأْبَ الشُّهَدَاءُ إِذَا مَا دُعُوا ۚ وَلَا تَسْأَمُوا أَن تَكْتُبُوهُ صَغِيرًا أَوْ كَبِيرًا إِلَىٰ أَجَلِهِ ۚ ذَٰلِكُمْ أَقْسَطُ عِندَ اللَّـهِ وَأَقْوَمُ لِلشَّهَادَةِ وَأَدْنَىٰ أَلَّا تَرْتَابُوا ۖ إِلَّا أَن تَكُونَ تِجَارَةً حَاضِرَةً تُدِيرُونَهَا بَيْنَكُمْ فَلَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ أَلَّا تَكْتُبُوهَا ۗ وَأَشْهِدُوا إِذَا تَبَايَعْتُمْ ۚ وَلَا يُضَارَّ كَاتِبٌ وَلَا شَهِيدٌ ۚ وَإِن تَفْعَلُوا فَإِنَّهُ فُسُوقٌ بِكُمْ ۗ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ ۖ وَيُعَلِّمُكُمُ اللَّـهُ ۗ وَاللَّـهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ

This can easily be broken up into 10 verses (instead of just 1) and there's many other verses like this. Look how the Bible has a "verse" every couple words.

The video of the sunnee leading that salaah is because none of our own scholars can recite the quraan properly with proper tajweed.

hehe :P

So if this is a SaHeeH hadeeth according to Hurr al-'Aamilee and Majlisee's father, then wouldn't the shee'ah opinion be FOR taHreef?

It truly is sad to see that we still don't have a decisive answer on this. This is a matter of aqeedah and not practice. If this is flawed, then the religion is flawed.

It makes you question the "shia" kaafirs who were inventing hadiths just to put Ahlul Bayt(as) in every little thing; especially the ones that are considered "thiqah"

It's obvious that there's no clear verses or emphasis on Imamate in the Quran, so the early deviants invented hadiths to justify their doctrine. Seriously look at the verses people quote over and over. 5:55 says that God and His Prophet and the righteous believers who pray and give zakat (or if you want to say "pray while giving zakat, fine)

Now let's compare this "proof" to what Allah(swt) says about the Prophet(pbuh):

وَإِذَا دُعُوا إِلَى اللَّـهِ وَرَسُولِهِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ إِذَا فَرِيقٌ مِّنْهُم مُّعْرِضُونَ

When they are called to God and His Messenger to judge between them, a party of them turns away.

إِنَّمَا كَانَ قَوْلَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذَا دُعُوا إِلَى اللَّـهِ وَرَسُولِهِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ أَن يَقُولُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا ۚ وَأُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ

The words of the true believers, when they are called to God and His Messenger to judge between them is "We hear and we obey" and they are the successful

وَمَن يُطِعِ اللَّـهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَيَخْشَ اللَّـهَ وَيَتَّقْهِ فَأُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَائِزُونَ

And whoever obeys God and His Messenger and fears God and is conscience of Him, they are the achievers

قُلْ أَطِيعُوا اللَّـهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ

Say: "Obey God and obey the Messenger"

فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا فَإِنَّمَا عَلَيْهِ مَا حُمِّلَ وَعَلَيْكُم مَّا حُمِّلْتُمْ ۖ وَإِن تُطِيعُوهُ تَهْتَدُ

And if you turn away from him (the Prophet), then he has what is on him and you have what is on you. And if you obey him, you will be guided

وَمَا عَلَى الرَّسُولِ إِلَّا الْبَلَاغُ الْمُبِينُ

And nothing is on the Messenger except a clear deliverance (of the message)

And the funny part is that these verses are from just 1 Surah-Surah al-Noor

Where do we find this emphasis for the Imams?

If a person actually examines the Quran, they find that Allah(swt) says that He gave the other divine Books to the scholars and they failed in their duty so He personally is going to protect this Quran

If these people have no trouble lying against Allah(swt), God knows what they invented against the Imams

Also, remember that Qazwini isn't just some random Sheikh; he is a scholar of high academic scholarship and has a whole series about tafsir of the Quran; i watch it every now and then. This isn't something to take lightly

was salam

Edited by lotfilms
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Site Administrators

One of these days can we have a serious discussion about tahreef and the narrations concerning it? We would be lying if we said there was no such hadith; there's many. And what if the narrations are authentic by our standards? What would that say about the Shia school?

Salams

Firstly, I think we have to clarify this stupid dogma that if a sanad of a narration is sahih, the narration itself becomes reliable and trustworthy and is always used by scholars to reach to conclusions/decisions. Science of Rijaal is just a tool/part of shia science of hadith. Just because the sanad is correct, doesn't mean the content is correct. It is common sense....

We had a lengthy discussion about tehreef of Quran (with lots of references and information) and lots of scholarly opinion (marjas/Ayatullahs) regarding the issue back in 2005/06. The search function is currently not working. I'll post the link to the thread when available. But just to let you know, there is nothing serious in shia text accepted by our scholars which suggests that our Quran is corrupt - Nauzbillah.

The common narration which is actually accepted by scholars as correct is the one which talks about Imam Mehdi bringing the Quran in chronological order. And I don't see anything wrong with the content of those narrations. They are not talking about tehreef of Quran. They are talking about the Final Imam bringing the same Quran in chronological order.

Fi-AManillah

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

First off, as i've said previously on this forum, i don't care about Sunni hadiths and i don't really want people quoting them in this topic. Let us start with ourselves first then move on.

1. You have not stated this in OP.

2. If you wanted only Shia hadiths and discussion on them, then why do you have this in Shia/Sunni section.

I would prefer to stick to Shia hadiths; at least for now.

Sorry, can't do, because you are calling Shia ulemas as Kaffur.

It makes you question the "shia" kaafirs who were inventing hadiths just to put Ahlul Bayt(as) in every little thing; especially the ones that are considered "thiqah"

You should call all your Sunni friends as kuffar, as no Shia has claimed from 1-4:

1. Quran has added words.

2. Quran has added verses.

3. Quran has added surahs.

4. The words are changed.

5. Verse were left out from the Quran and/or incomplete verses.

The Shia have only claimed number 5 above.

It's obvious that there's no clear verses or emphasis on Imamate in the Quran, so the early deviants invented hadiths to justify their doctrine. Where do we find this emphasis for the Imams?

You cannot make this claim, as both Sunni and Shia have claimed that verses were left out of the Quran.

Also, remember that Qazwini isn't just some random Sheikh; he is a scholar of high academic scholarship and has a whole series about tafsir of the Quran; i watch it every now and then. This isn't something to take lightly

Proof was given to you from hadiths about the verse quoted by Ayatollah Qazwini, but you chose to ignore it in your ignorance.

These are all in sahih Bukhari and sahih Muslim, the two most authenticated books of Sunni hadiths:

1. Quran has added words.

2. Quran has added verses.

3. Quran has added surahs.

4. The words are changed.

5. Verse were left out from the Quran and/or incomplete verses.

Once more, both Sunni and Shia claim that verses were left out the Quran, therefore you cannot claim with surety that the Quran didn't have immate (as) in it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...