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

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.

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)

A hadith in al-Kafi by Muhammad bin Ya'qub al-Kulayni states that the Qur‘an revealed to our Holy Prophet (saw) contained 7000 verses and this hadith itself is what many of the accusers use against the Shia. But one must understand a few things. First, al-Kulayni was not a Shi‘ite scholar but a hadith recorder and as everyone knows there are strong hadiths and there are weak ones. This hadith by al-Kulayni is regarded as a weak hadith. Second, most if not all prominent

Shia scholars say that the Qur‘an we have now, the same one used by Sunnis and Shia, is the one revealed to the Holy Prophet (saw).

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.

Lastly, I would like to show you the introduction to al-Kulayni‘s book Al-Kafi and let you decide if he really believed in the hadith or not of the 700 verses.

Al-Kulayni mentioned in his introduction to his book the following: "Brother, may God lead you to the right road. You ought to know that it is impossible for anyone to distinguish the truth from the untruth when Muslim scholars disagree upon statements attributed to the Imams. There is only one way to separate the true from the untrue reports, through the standard which was declared by the Imam:

"'Test the various reports by the Book of God; whatever agrees with it take it,whatever disagrees with it reject it."'Take what is agreed upon (by scholars). Certainly the universally accepted should not be doubted.'"

Edited by Repentant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam lightOfMonotheism,

There is no narration from the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt saying that the Qur'an is corrupted. They themselves used to refer to the Qur'an and explained laws on the basis of the same Qur'an of Rasulallah(saw). Why would they do this if it was corrupted?

And no shia believes that the Qur'an is corrupted. Its just plain absurd.

Also, Our great ulamas also state that any muslim who says that the Qur'an is corrupted is a liar.

Khz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Mr. Rafidhi,

I dont think Allama Almajlisi believed that the Qur'an is corrupted. :donno: Maybe there were some muslim scholors who had that belief. hah..But that just does not make any sense ya knw. I just dont pay attention to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Mr. Rafidhi,

I dont think Allama Almajlisi believed that the Qur'an is corrupted. :donno: Maybe there were some muslim scholors who had that belief. hah..But that just does not make any sense ya knw. I just dont pay attention to that.

walikumsalam

its a well known fact that allama majlisi belived in tehreef of quran and so as faiz al kashani. moreover the 12 grand mujtehids the author of tarjuma maqbool also believed in tehreef.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Salaam Mr. Rafidhi,

They may have this belief. As I said earlier, the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt themselves used to refer to the Qur'an and explained laws on the basis of the same Qur'an of Rasulallah(saw). Why would they do this if it was corrupted? The Imams are higher than any other Ulama.

Also I personally dont bother if any ulama has such beliefs. Srsly bro, I cant believe muslims have reached such a level that they're accusing each other of having such beliefs.

Khz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Salaam Mr. Rafidhi,

They may have this belief. As I said earlier, the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt themselves used to refer to the Qur'an and explained laws on the basis of the same Qur'an of Rasulallah(saw). Why would they do this if it was corrupted? The Imams are higher than any other Ulama.

right imams (as) are higher than any ulema.

Also I personally dont bother if any ulama has such beliefs. Srsly bro, I cant believe muslims have reached such a level that they're accusing each other of having such beliefs.

Majlisi says:

در قرآن در آیات بسیار نام علی بود کھ عثمان بیرون کردہ

In Quran, the name of Ali was present in many verses which Uthman removed.

Tazkiratul Aimma, by Baqir Majlisi, p. 42-43

Also, Our great ulamas also state that any muslim who says that the Qur'an is corrupted is a liar.

so can we say majlisi (ra) was a liar

(wasalam)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.... For over 1,000 years it has remained unchanged. This is why the Qur'an is different from the Bible... the bible was changed and corrupted while Allah (swt) tells us the Qur'an is protected. Forget what some people say - how about you go see what Allah (swt) says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.... For over 1,000 years it has remained unchanged. This is why the Qur'an is different from the Bible... the bible was changed and corrupted while Allah (swt) tells us the Qur'an is protected. Forget what some people say - how about you go see what Allah (swt) says.

i agree with you but kindly just tell me a person who believes in tehreef is what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
“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

Shia Muslims collectively believe that the Qur'an we have is free from all textual distortions. It's the same Qur'an God revealed upon Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and his descendants). Yes, distortion was made in the arrangement of the verses as we all know that Q. 96 is the first chapter of Qur'an revealed and Q. 5:3 is the last verse revealed. Fabricated interpretation of Qur'an is also a kind of distortion but the letters in Qur'an are indeed the word of God. See this:

http://en.shiapen.com/comprehensive/tahreef/shia-scholars-completeness-quran.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

 

good post, brother Qaim. I'm sorry to resurrect this topic, but I was looking and I wanted to add to your statement here that we do know that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and Ahlul Bayt did continue to receive divine messages outside of the main Qu'ran. For instance, it's agreed by many learned men that Fatima Zahra (as) received revelations or visitations from Angel Gabriel (as) and that she wrote down what she was told. We also know that similar things happened with all the Imams to varying degrees. From a traditional Shi'ite perspective, revelation did not technically end with the Qu'ran if we accept the divine inspiration of the Imams and other holy figures. But we can say that the common Qu'ran we have in our possession, aside from the distortions in arrangement that everyone accepts is a complete text as it is. I wouldn't say this means however that there are no supplementary materials in the possession of the current Imam or in our own possession right now that are not divine as well and cannot be considered partners of the Qu'ran which help to illuminate its verses but which may or may not be made readily available to the common person. There are the hadith qudsi spoken by Allah to his servants outside the Qu'ran and the books which are hidden with the Imam right now such as the original Injil and the Book of Fatimah I just mentioned.

 

I think when we say "the Qu'ran is complete," we should clarify what we mean by "Qu'ran" and "complete." I think we can say the Qu'ran we possess is complete but this does not mean that the Qu'ran reflects all the revelations/messages the Prophet or Ahlul Bayt received in their time on earth, many of which were not made public or were differentiated from the main Qu'ran. This of course is not the same as saying the Qu'ran is corrupted or incomplete as it is. Rather it is more like saying that the Qu'ran we possess was specifically tailored by God in its totality with both the spiritual elite and the common person alike in mind and while there are other books of revelations which bring to light its meaning and details and perhaps even fit into the same time frame as a number of its verses or chapters, the current Qu'ran is a totality in itself while everything else I mentioned is a complimentary totality rather than a missing piece of the Qu'ran's own totality. Not sure if I worded that in the best way.

Edited by Saintly_Jinn23

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^... Saintly, 

 

Revelation ended with the Prophet . There is a difference between Inspiration and Revelation. The former can be given to any human being (including you or I), whereas the latter is given to Prophets & Messengers, and this ended with the Final Prophet, Muhammad al-Mustafa [sawa]. 

 

Also, I don't understand why many Shia say the order is wrong (as you have alluded too). The order is not wrong. Again, people need to keep in mind there is a difference between order of Revelation & the order of recitation.

 

 

 

 

I think when we say "the Qu'ran is complete," we should clarify what we mean by "Qu'ran" and "complete." I think we can say the Qu'ran we possess is complete but this does not mean that the Qu'ran reflects all the revelations/messages the Prophet or Ahlul Bayt received in their time on earth, many of which were not made public or were differentiated from the main Qu'ran. This of course is not the same as saying the Qu'ran is corrupted or incomplete as it is. Rather it is more like saying that the Qu'ran we possess was specifically tailored by God in its totality with both the spiritual elite and the common person alike in mind and while there are other books of revelations which bring to light its meaning and details and perhaps even fit into the same time frame as a number of its verses or chapters, the current Qu'ran is a totality in itself while everything else I mentioned is a complimentary totality rather than a missing piece of the Qu'ran's own totality. Not sure if I worded that in the best way.

 

 

The Qur'an is what God gave to the Prophet, not what the Ahl al-Bayt taught. The Imams did not receive revelation from Allah, rather, they were inspired by God. The teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt are in the Hadith literature which is accessible to many of us. The instructions given to the Prophet by Allah are found in the Qur'an. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Revelation ended with the Prophet . There is a difference between Inspiration and Revelation. The former can be given to any human being (including you or I), whereas the latter is given to Prophets & Messengers, and this ended with the Final Prophet, Muhammad al-Mustafa [sawa]. 

 

There are different kinds of revelation. Keep in mind we're using english words here. There are no more "prophets," but the Imams and Fatima (as) still received divine knowledge and not all of that knowledge was meant to be available for everyone. The Qu'ran was meant to be available for everyone, but other divine knowledge received by the Prophet or Ahlul Bayt which was relevant to the Qu'ran, although not meant to be part of its pages, was not disclosed in the same manner except to their most intimate followers.

 

The Qur'an is what God gave to the Prophet, not what the Ahl al-Bayt taught. 

 

I don't really see the difference.

 

 

 

The Imams did not receive revelation from Allah, rather, they were inspired by God. 

 

Again, I don't quite see the difference. We both agree they received divine knowledge and nothing they said came from anyone except Allah, yes?

 

 

 The teachings of the Ahl al-Bayt are in the Hadith literature which is accessible to many of us. 

 

Yes, but not everything Ahlul Bayt taught is found in the hadith literature or the Qu'ran. What I was trying to say is that there are some books and knowledge which are in the sole possession of the Imam and whose contents are only known by a select few. The Qu'ran is complete in the sense that it is a totality in its own right and all of it is divinely inspired, but it is also "incomplete" in the sense that it does not possess within itself all the divine knowledge received by the Prophet or Ahlul Bayt. The rest of that is either known to us through the authentic hadith or it is kept secret from us by the Imam himself.

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...