Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
lightOfMonotheism

Shia Doctrine About Corruption Of The Quran.

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

First of all the OP is asking about Shia stance on those major Shia scholars who believed in Tahreef of Quran. Some of you are quoting narrations from Sunni books. That is not an answer.

I was wondering what views the 12ers on this forum have regarding Tabrassi, Muhammad bin Yaqoub ibn Ishaq al-Kulainy and other top Shia scholars who belived in tahref(corruption).

I was also wondering about the fact that there doesnt exist 1 narration from the "Infallible" Imams stating that the Quran is not corrupted or so stated by the Shia scholar Ni'matallah al-Jaza'iri.

Salaam Aleykum brother,

According to Shia scholars those Shia scholars who believed in Tahrif were just 'mistaken'. So in Shiasm if you believe that the Book of Allah has been distorted then you are just 'mistaken'. That is how lightly they take this serious issue.

Now lets look at some Sunni hadiths.

Muslim also reported in the Book of al-Rida'ah (Book of Nursing), part 10, page 29, that 'A'ishah said the following:"There was in what was revealed in the Qur'an that ten times of nursing known with certainty makes the nursing woman a mother of a nursed child. This number of nursing would make the woman 'haram' (forbidden) to the child.The this verse was replaced by 'five known nursing to make the woman forbidden to the child. The Prophet died while these words were recorded and read in the Qur'an."

And also

Al-Muttaqi 'Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book "Mukhtasar Kanz al-'Ummal" printed on the margin of Imam Ahmad's Musnad, part two, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33,said that Ibn Mardawayh reported that Hudhayfah said: 'Umar said to me 'How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?' I said, '72 or 73 verses.' He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning.

These narrations talk about Naskh & Mansukh (abrogated verses). Nothing to do with Tahreef (the second one is not Saheeh anyways). You better answer the OP who is asking about Major Shia shcolars who believed in Tahreef of Quran and what is their status in Shiasm?

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

I was wondering what views the 12ers on this forum have regarding Tabrassi, Muhammad bin Yaqoub ibn Ishaq al-Kulainy and other top Shia scholars who belived in tahref(corruption).

I was also wondering about the fact that there doesnt exist 1 narration from the "Infallible" Imams stating that the Quran is not corrupted or so stated by the Shia scholar Ni'matallah al-Jaza'iri.

And what makes you believe that Muhammad bin Yaqoub ibn Ishaq al-Kulainy believed in that? In Shia Islam we don't believe that a hadith book is completely correct - and just because he might have had hadiths does not believe he believed in them.

Edited by Repentant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

And what makes you believe that Muhammad bin Yaqoub ibn Ishaq al-Kulainy believed in that? In Shia Islam we don't believe that a hadith book is completely correct - and just because he might have had hadiths does not believe he believed in them.

Many Shia scholars have confirmed that Kulayni believed in Tahreef.

For example:

Shia shaykh Sayed Tayeeb Mosawi al-Jazairi in his saying on commentary of Qummi, wrote:

ولكن الظاهر من كلمات غيرهم من العلماء والمحدثين المتقدمين منهم والمتأخرين القول بالنقيصة كالكليني والبرقى، والعياشي والنعماني، وفرات بن ابراهيم، واحمد بن ابى طالب الطبرسي صاحب الاحتجاج والمجلسى، والسيد الجزائري، والحر العاملي، والعلامة الفتوني، والسيد البحراني وقد تمسكوا في اثبات مذهبهم بالآيات والروايات التى لا يمكن الاغماض عنها والذي يهون الخطب ان التحريف اللازم على قولهم يسير جدا مخصوص بآيات الولاية.

“and what is obvious from the words of those other than them, from the early and later scholars of hadith, is the proponence of [the belief in] omission. Such as: al-Kulayni, al-Barqi, al-Ayashi, an-Nomani, and Furat ibn Ibrahim (al-Koofe), Ahmad ibn Abu Talib a-Tabrasi author of “al-Ihtijaj”, al-Majlisi, sayed Jazairi, al-Hurr al-Amili, allama al-Fattuni, sayed al-Bahrani. They have held on tightly to the verses and narrations, that cannot possibly be looked away from, to establish their opinion. The thing that makes disaster less than it is, they said tahrif happen in very small proportion, only in verses on wilayat”.

http://al-shia.org/h...ommi-j1/20.html

If our core link to Islam, the Qur'an is corrupt then what is the point in believing in Islam anymore? One of the miracles of the Qur'an is that it can not be corrupted....

Those Shia scholars who believed in Tahreef claimed the real Quran is with Imam Mahdi. They believed the current Quran is altered but the real one with twelfth Imam is safe and when he appears he shall bring it.

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many Shia scholars have confirmed that Kulayni believed in Tahreef.

For example:

Shia shaykh Sayed Tayeeb Mosawi al-Jazairi in his saying on commentary of Qummi, wrote:

ولكن الظاهر من كلمات غيرهم من العلماء والمحدثين المتقدمين منهم والمتأخرين القول بالنقيصة كالكليني والبرقى، والعياشي والنعماني، وفرات بن ابراهيم، واحمد بن ابى طالب الطبرسي صاحب الاحتجاج والمجلسى، والسيد الجزائري، والحر العاملي، والعلامة الفتوني، والسيد البحراني وقد تمسكوا في اثبات مذهبهم بالآيات والروايات التى لا يمكن الاغماض عنها والذي يهون الخطب ان التحريف اللازم على قولهم يسير جدا مخصوص بآيات الولاية.

“and what is obvious from the words of those other than them, from the early and later scholars of hadith, is the proponence of [the belief in] omission. Such as: al-Kulayni, al-Barqi, al-Ayashi, an-Nomani, and Furat ibn Ibrahim (al-Koofe), Ahmad ibn Abu Talib a-Tabrasi author of “al-Ihtijaj”, al-Majlisi, sayed Jazairi, al-Hurr al-Amili, allama al-Fattuni, sayed al-Bahrani. They have held on tightly to the verses and narrations, that cannot possibly be looked away from, to establish their opinion. The thing that makes disaster less than it is, they said tahrif happen in very small proportion, only in verses on wilayat”.

http://al-shia.org/h...ommi-j1/20.html

Those Shia scholars who believed in Tahreef claimed the real Quran is with Imam Mahdi. They believed the current Quran is altered but the real one with twelfth Imam is safe and when he appears he shall bring it.

Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian.

(Holy Qur‘an 15:9)

You believe in them or Allah (swt) words?

Those Shia scholars who believed in Tahreef claimed the real Quran is with Imam Mahdi. They believed the current Quran is altered but the real one with twelfth Imam is safe and when he appears he shall bring it.

That makes no sense... then how do we as Muslims benefit from Islam with fake Qur'an. How is it fair we will be judged upon a fake book? This is not logical at all and thus can not be true.

What about Hadith al-Thaqalayn. Now we neither have an Imam among us as Muslims before nor do we have the Qur'an.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian.

(Holy Qur‘an 15:9)

You believe in them or Allah (swt) words?

Of course I believe the words of Allah. But look how Shia scholar Abul Hassan al-Amili responds to those Shia who DON'T believe in Tahreef: He also mentions the verse you quoted:

"And who rejected that (tahrif) show as a proof verses: “and most surely ” (41:41) it is a Mighty Book: (42) Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the Praised One”, and “(15:9) Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian”. It could be said in answer: After we would accept that verses are proof for their aims, it’s apparent from we have explained, the complete real Quran as it was revealed by Allah, protected (one is) with imam, and he inherited it from Ali (alaihi salam).." (Tafsir al-Burhan)

That makes no sense... then how do we as Muslims benefit from Islam with fake Qur'an. How is it fair we will be judged upon a fake book? This is not logical at all and thus can not be true.

Of course their claim is false. It is blasphemy to make such claim. I agree with you.

Edited by Abul Hussain Hassani

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the OP wants some actual academic responses to this inquiry (regarding the notion of tahreef in the Shi'i intellectual tradition),

Resources

1 Early Debates on the Integrity of the Qur'an: A Brief Survey by Hossein Modarressi

2

by Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi

3 The Prolegomena to the Qur'an by Sayyid Abu al-Qasim al-Khu'i (Limited preview, although you may be able to find the book at university libraries)

It becomes clear that scholars of the Shi'i tradition are far from having one unified position with respect to the notion of tahreef. Rather, both the early proto-Shi'ites and proto-Sunnis had a significant portion of their adherents claiming tahreef in the Qur'an, particularly during the period in which the 'Uthmanic codex was declared the 'official' version and other copies burned. What remains unclear is the origin of this dispute in the early formative period of Islam. It appears that the early Shi'ite scholarship of the pre-Buyid period upheld the theory of tahreef in the Qur'an. During the time, reports attributed to the Imams claimed that verses of the Qur'an were tampered with, particularly those pertaining to `Ali [as]. Many of these alleged verses were often direct copies from other alleged Qur'anic versions, namely that of Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy ibn Ka'b. Interesting is the fact that such companions had drastically different records of the text, claiming the name of `Ali [as] among others, before such distinct lines as Shi'ah and Sunni could be drawn. Other theories claim that the notion of tahreef among Shi'ites originated from polemical debates with Sunnis. They grappled with the difficulty of explaining why the names of the Imams, namely `Ali [as], were not explicitly mentioned in the Qur'an, assuming the Imamate is a central tenet of the religion. As a result, they claimed that the names were removed from the 'Uthmanic codex, relying on the other previously-mentioned versions.

So, it becomes a chicken-and-egg problem. Did the early Shi'ites falsely claim that the actual Qur'an contained the name of `Ali [as] among others, simply to overcome these polemical debates? If we say yes, then how do we account for the drastically different versions of the text they drew upon from such prominent companions (who were technically neither Shi'ite or Sunni)? Could it be that these alleged verses were actually revealed to the Prophet [sawa], although not actually part of the Qur'an per se, and later transmitted to `Ali [as] and subsequently other companions (which is why reports of the Qur'an of `Ali [as] claimed to contain far more material than the 'Uthmanic codex). Could it be that `Ali [as]'s Book contained not only the 'actual' Qur'an, but also commentary and other revelations taught to him by the Messenger [sawa], as later Shi'ite scholars would claim? Your guess is as good as mine.

...Wa Allahu 'Alam.

(wasalam)

Edited by Ibn al-Hassan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(bismillah)

Im just shocked that belief in tahreef can exist till today?!

sunni group video but it was said on the minbar none the less

I asked Sayyid Murtadha's grandson about this, this video is misleading. Sayyid Murtadha Qazwini does not believe in physical tahreef of the Qur'an, he believes that the interpretation has been tampered with it...which no one disagrees with.

As to all the narrations about Tahreef, they are not necessarily tahreef in physical text. Such as the Imam [as] adding tafseer into recitation (something Ibn Abbas is noted to have done, too) as well as things relating to tahreef of tafseer/taweel.

We do not hold Tahreef to be kufr, in any case. Their Islam is maintained (they uphold the Usool and Furu al-deen), though they hold an incorrect belief.

في امان الله

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to substantiate your claim. If you've got an argument with evidence, we'll respond to it from our perspective. The majority of our scholars say that the Qur'an has not been physically changed, but some scholars have held that position. Both Sunni and Shi`i books have narrations that allude to a form of tahreef, and if you've never read the Sunni sources, you could do a simple google search. `Umar said that Surat al-Ahzab was almost the same length as Surat al-Baqara in Kanz al-Ummal, Ibn Mas`ud (ra) left the last two Surahs out of his mus`haf in the Musannaf of ibn Abi Shayba, and Ibn `Abbas (ra) would recite extra phrases that are not found in the written Qur'an. Narrations to this effect does not mean the scholars accepted this view; so simply posting narrations will not help your case much, because we can do the same to you.

Then there's the differences in qira'a. Yeah, most of your teachers probably have told you that the qira'at do not differ in any serious way. But if you take a closer look and compare, you will find that there are differences in letters and words that change the tafsir of the verse.

I don't believe in tahreef, and from what we can gather, neither did our shaykhs Saduq and Tusi. Some have pointed at al-Mufid as a believer of tahreef, but there is doubt in the authorship of Masa'il as-Sarawiyya attributed to him (where the statement is made). The infallible Imams (no quotations) transmitted a codex of the Qur'an, and this qira'a is called Hamza or qira'at Ahl al-Bayt - it does not remove or add verses. The Imams instructed us to compare all hadiths with the Qur'an and to drop any hadith that contradicts it. The Imams said all of the accepted qira'at are equally valid for use. The Imams have emphasized that we are rewarded for reading the mus`haf of you and me, and even just looking at it is considered worship. All Shi`a Muslims refer to the Qur'an in the same way other Muslims do, period.

The evidences for tahreef come from the narrations that discuss it, and the narrations where the Imams have added phrases to verses. The former are all weak according to classical hadith sciences. The latter can be explained as ta'weel - ta'weel are special interpretations of the Qur'an that the sahaba and the Imams would sometimes recite with a sura. Some scholars have taken these and other contextual evidences as a proof for tahreef, like Kulayni, but this does not mean our whole madhhab agrees with these scholars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
“and what is obvious from the words of those other than them, from the early and later scholars of hadith, is the proponence of [the belief in] omission. Such as: al-Kulayni, al-Barqi, al-Ayashi, an-Nomani, and Furat ibn Ibrahim (al-Koofe), Ahmad ibn Abu Talib a-Tabrasi author of “al-Ihtijaj”, al-Majlisi, sayed Jazairi, al-Hurr al-Amili, allama al-Fattuni, sayed al-Bahrani. They have held on tightly to the verses and narrations, that cannot possibly be looked away from, to establish their opinion. The thing that makes disaster less than it is, they said tahrif happen in very small proportion, only in verses on wilayat”.

http://al-shia.org/html/ara/books/lib-quran/tafsir-qommi-j1/20.html

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

“As for (the opinion of) OUR SCHOLARS (may Allah be pleased with them (!!!)) on this topic, then what is obvious from Thiqatul Islam Muhammad bin Ya’kub AL-KULAYNI that he believed in the MANIPULATION AND LOSS in the QURAAN because he recorded narrations of this meaning in his book Al-Kafi without criticizing it at all, besides he mentioned at the beginning of his book that he trusted in what he had narrated and also (this applies to) his teacher Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Qummy (may Allah be pleased with him (!!!)) since his tafsir is full of that (manipulation of the Quraan) and he has some extremism on this topic and also Sheikh Ahmad bin Abi Talib Al-TABRASSI (may Allah be pleased with him (!!!)) since he followed these two (on this matter) exactly in his Al-Ihtijaj”

Fayz Kashani “Tafsir as-safi” vol 1, p 52

Abul Hasan al-Amili argument again 15:9

And who rejected that (tahrif) show as a proof verses: “and most surely ” (41:41) it is a Mighty Book: (42) Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the Praised One”, and“(15:9) Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian.”

It could be said in answer: “After we would accept that verses are proof for their aims, it’s apparent from we have explained, the complete real Quran as it was revealed by Allah, protected (one is) with imam, and he inherited it from Ali (alaihi salam)

fn3002.jpg?w=191&h=300&h=300Scan from book

Some ahia scholars who belived in corruption of the Quran

Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi. Muhammad ibn Yaqub Al-Kulayni. Sheikh Mufid. Ayatolla Shubbar. Muhammad Salih Mazandarani.

Mirza Habibullah al-Khui. Nematullah Jazairi. Sheikh Wahid Bahbahani. Fayz Kashani. Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi.

Sharafutdin Abdulhusayn al-Musawi. Sharif al-Murtada, Ahmad ibn Abu Talib a-Tabrasi and Ayatollat Mirza Jawad at-Tabrizi.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was wondering what views the 12ers on this forum have regarding Tabrassi, Muhammad bin Yaqoub ibn Ishaq al-Kulainy and other top Shia scholars who belived in tahref(corruption).

I was also wondering about the fact that there doesnt exist 1 narration from the "Infallible" Imams stating that the Quran is not corrupted or so stated by the Shia scholar Ni'matallah al-Jaza'iri.

BELIEF OF SHIA IN THE COMPLETENESS OF QURAN

1- IF someone say that Shia believe Quran is not complete. The 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.

2- 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. 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.

3-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.

4- 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 was one of the earliest Shia scholars.

5- 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

6-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."

7-With this various concern by the most eminent Shia scholars, there is no possibility that the Quran was added or deleted in some parts.

8-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.

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...