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  
submitter71

Who Preserved the Quran?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, skamran110 said:

Why the first caliph and his companions rejected the Quran compiled by Imam Ali?

 

We do not believe that the Quran was compiled by Ali (as). Will you share evidence from Sunni and Shia hadiths that he compiled the Quran?

Edited by submitter71

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

 

Here is the book online http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/

See the chapter أضواء على القراء where he brings opinions of hadith scholars weakening them. He does this with Asim and Hafs. Both can be found here http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa26.html

Finally, he says that these recitations are not reliable because of the weakness of the quraa here http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa33.html and that these recitations are from the ijtihad of the quraa, including Hafs from Asim.

 

The Sunni view is that all of the authentic recitations are from Allah azza wa jal and that they are complimentary of one another and provide additional meanings to the verses. How else can you explain that the Ummah recited both Maliki yawmi al deen and Maaliki yawmi al deen? It is not possible that there could be a mistake in a verse that was recited by the Prophet salalahu alaihi wa salam out loud at least six times a day.  

This view is accepted by Shia scholar Al Fadhli as well. He goes against Al Khoei's conclusions. 

So isn't al-Khoei, one of the biggest contemporary Shia Scholar of Hadeeth is attacking the authenticity of Quran in a sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AbbaJaan said:

So isn't al-Khoei, one of the biggest contemporary Shia Scholar of Hadeeth is attacking the authenticity of Quran in a sense?

 

He only attacks the recitations of the Quran. To me, the recitations and the Quran are the same thing. Both are from Allah azza wa jal.

Of course, anyone who believes that the recitation of Hafs from Asim is from Allah azza wa jal will strongly disagree with Al Khoei. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, submitter71 said:

 

He only attacks the recitations of the Quran. To me, the recitations and the Quran are the same thing. Both are from Allah azza wa jal.

Of course, anyone who believes that the recitation of Hafs from Asim is from Allah azza wa jal will strongly disagree with Al Khoei. 

So if recitations are attacked, then what remains in the Quran, the drawing of the letters(that too which was done by companions)? Wasn't Quran revealed in the form of speech, Not in the form of tablet or mushaf. ?

Edited by AbbaJaan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AbbaJaan said:

So if recitations are attacked, then what remains in the Quran, the drawing of the letters(that too which was done by companions)? Wasn't Quran revealed in the form of speech, Not in the form of tablet or mushaf. ?

 

In my opinion, if one says that the recitations are rejected, then it means that the Quran is rejected. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, submitter71 said:

 

In my opinion, if one says that the recitations are rejected, then it means that the Quran is rejected. 

OMG, that's a dangerous belief then. I don't know how many Shias share this belief of Grand Ayatullah Khoei.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunnis need to dissect from there own literature, as to why there is confusing facts on when and how the Quran was collected. One of the traditions tells us that the Quran was collected during Abu Bakr time who took over after Muhammad (pbuh&hf) died. After the Yamama battle, during Abu Bakr’s time, Omar got worried about losing parts of the Quran. The reason for that is that many of those who memorized the Quran or major parts of it died in that battle. Abu Bakr, then, asked Zaid Ibn Thabitto takes on this task of collecting the Quran. Zaid collected the Qur’anic verses that were written on many different kinds of materials used for writing at the time then this version of the Quran was handed over to Abu Bakr, who passed it to Umar on his deathbed. Umar did the same and gave this version of the Quran to his daughter Hafsa. This above tradition of how the Quran was collected is suspect to many criticisms. First, this Quran was not treated as an official codex, but as a private property of Hafsa “official” Quran. Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"The responsibility of its collection and its arrangement lies on Us" (75:17)

     
075:017 Khan
:
It is for Us to collect it and to give you (O Muhammad SAW) the ability to recite it (the Qur'an),
     
075:017 Maulana
:
Surely on Us rests the collecting of it and the reciting of it.
     
075:017 Pickthal
:
Lo! upon Us (resteth) the putting together thereof and the reading thereof.
     
075:017 Rashad
:
It is we who will collect it into Quran.
     
075:017 Sarwar
:
We shall be responsible for its collection and its recitation.
     
075:017 Shakir
:
Surely on Us (devolves) the collecting of it and the reciting of it.
     
075:017 Sherali
:
Surely, upon US rests its collection and its recital.
     
075:017 Yusufali
:

It is for Us to collect it and to promulgate it:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, submitter71 said:

 

We do not believe that the Quran was compiled by Ali (as). Will you share evidence from Sunni and Shia hadiths that he compiled the Quran?

The Commander of Believers, ‘Ali (as), possessed a special transcript of the text of Qur’an which he had collected himself, and he was THE FIRST who compiled Qur’an. There are a great number of traditions from Sunni and Shi’a which states that after the death of the Holy Prophet (S), Imam ‘Ali sat down in his house and said that he had sworn an oath that he would not put on his outdoor clothes or leave his house until he collects together the Qur’an.

References:

- Fat’hul Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p386
- al-fihrist, by (Ibn) an-Nadim, p30
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p165
- al-Masahif, by Ibn Abi Dawud, p10
- Hilyatul awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p67
- al-Sahibi, by Ibn Faris, p79
- ‘Umdatul Qari, by al-Ayni, v20, p16
- Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, pp 112-113
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, Section 4, p197
- Ma’rifat al-Qurra’ al-kibar, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p31

There are also traditions from the Imams of Ahlul Bayt which tell us that this was done by Imam ‘Ali by order of the Holy Prophet (See al-Bihar, v92, pp 40-41,48,51-52).

https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia-ahlul-bayt-dilp-team/belief-shia-in-completeness-quran#qur’-compiled-imam-‘ali

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, skamran110 said:

The Commander of Believers, ‘Ali (as), possessed a special transcript of the text of Qur’an which he had collected himself, and he was THE FIRST who compiled Qur’an. There are a great number of traditions from Sunni and Shi’a which states that after the death of the Holy Prophet (S), Imam ‘Ali sat down in his house and said that he had sworn an oath that he would not put on his outdoor clothes or leave his house until he collects together the Qur’an.

Sunni references:

- Fat’hul Bari fi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p386
- al-fihrist, by (Ibn) an-Nadim, p30
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p165
- al-Masahif, by Ibn Abi Dawud, p10
- Hilyatul awliya’, by Abu Nu’aym, v1, p67
- al-Sahibi, by Ibn Faris, p79
- ‘Umdatul Qari, by al-Ayni, v20, p16
- Kanzul Ummal, by al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, v15, pp 112-113
- al-Sawa’iq al-Muhriqah, by Ibn Hajar al-Haythami, Ch. 9, Section 4, p197
- Ma’rifat al-Qurra’ al-kibar, by al-Dhahabi, v1, p31

There are also traditions from the Imams of Ahlul Bayt which tell us that this was done by Imam ‘Ali by order of the Holy Prophet (See al-Bihar, v92, pp 40-41,48,51-52).

https://www.al-islam.org/shiite-encyclopedia-ahlul-bayt-dilp-team/belief-shia-in-completeness-quran#qur’-compiled-imam-‘ali

 

It seems like you are not aware of what you are quoting brother. I checked out some of the references that you quoted, like Dhahabi and Al Haythami, and they both quote the narrator saying that the Quran collected by Ali (as) is not the same as the Quran today and that it was in order of revelation. 

So, even if we accept this report, then it still proves that the Quran that we rely on today is through the efforts of Uthman (ra). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

 

It seems like you are not aware of what you are quoting brother. I checked out some of the references that you quoted, like Dhahabi and Al Haythami, and they both quote the narrator saying that the Quran collected by Ali (as) is not the same as the Quran today and that it was in order of revelation. 

So, even if we accept this report, then it still proves that the Quran that we rely on today is through the efforts of Uthman (ra). 

brother the reference simply proves that the Quran was complied by Imam Ali after the death of the prophet saww. So the claim of compiling any one else or caliph  is false.

The history does tell us that the quran complied by Imam Ali was rejected by the caliph 1.

We should see the facts instead of some one dearer to us in our mind.

Wasaalam

 

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, skamran110 said:

brother the reference simply proves that the Quran was complied by Imam Ali after the death of the prophet saww. So the claim of compiling any one else is false.

The history does tell us that the quran complied by Imam Ali was rejected by the caliph 1.

 

Again, if we assume that the Quran compiled by Ali (as) was rejected, then we are following a Quran that was compiled by someone else. 

That is the point of the thread brother. The preservation of the Quran is from someone else. History testifies that the recitations are based upon Uthman's (ra) compilation. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

Again, if we assume that the Quran compiled by Ali (as) was rejected, then we are following a Quran that was compiled by someone else. 

That is the point of the thread brother. The preservation of the Quran is from someone else. History testifies that the recitations are based upon Uthman's (ra) compilation. 

If we discuss compilation of quran then the role of imam Ali in compilation as first compiler  is well  proven in history and it cannot be neglected .

The Qur’an which was compiled by Imam ‘Ali  and the Qur’an that is in the hand of people today, are identical in terms of words and sentences. No word, verse, chapter is missing. The only difference is that the current Qur’an (collected by the companions) is not in the order that was revealed.

however if it is considered that the quran was only complied and distributed in the period of Uthman then the allegation of neglecting the importance of quran by the first two caliph comes true.and it can be considered as major sin on their part.  Why they neglected the importance of quran for so many years of their rule that resulted in ummah being devoid of the quran?

This question strongly arises.

Waslam

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, skamran110 said:

The Qur’an which was compiled by Imam ‘Ali  and the Qur’an that is in the hand of people today, are identical in terms of words and sentences. No word, verse, chapter is missing. The only difference is that the current Qur’an (collected by the companions) is not in the order that was revealed.

 

You are making many assumptions brother. 

Did the Mus-haf of Ali (as) have dotting and diacritical marks? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

You are making many assumptions brother. 

Did the Mus-haf of Ali (as) have dotting and diacritical marks? 

I am mentioning the script and Arabic text and that has been protected by Allah swt.

Aaraabs were placed in the rule of Hjaj bin yusuf. 

Are you trying to avoid the obvious questions regarding the negligence of the first two  caliphs in compilation of Quran?

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, submitter71 said:

 

Here is the book online http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/

See the chapter أضواء على القراء where he brings opinions of hadith scholars weakening them. He does this with Asim and Hafs. Both can be found here http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa26.html

Finally, he says that these recitations are not reliable because of the weakness of the quraa here http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa33.html and that these recitations are from the ijtihad of the quraa, including Hafs from Asim.

 

The Sunni view is that all of the authentic recitations are from Allah azza wa jal and that they are complimentary of one another and provide additional meanings to the verses. How else can you explain that the Ummah recited both Maliki yawmi al deen and Maaliki yawmi al deen? It is not possible that there could be a mistake in a verse that was recited by the Prophet salalahu alaihi wa salam out loud at least six times a day.  

This view is accepted by Shia scholar Al Fadhli as well. He goes against Al Khoei's conclusions. 

 

You are gravely mistaken.

You only quote the sections where he is highlighting the massive errors of the sunni view. The later chapters explain his views. Eg your quoting chapters of "examining the reading", in which he highlights the issues of the sunni view. Next chapter is about 7 harfs, then protection from tahrif, then it discusses the shia position of collection of quran vs sunni position.

In short, he is saying the Shia believe compilation during the Prophets SAW lifetime, and he is not criticising the hafs content, but the notion that it was actually formulated at the time of hafs. He argues that it was already collected by then.

If your able to read it, then I would be interested to see your opinion on his view of the 7 harfs. Eg you believe in it because of a few hadiths that have reached you, some are ahad, and they all contradict each other. Essentially there is not one theory in sunni theology of why there is 7 qurans. 

Ayatollah Khoie collects all the different hadiths and theories and tries to see if there is anyway they could be true, but the claims are so diverse it can not be done. I think there are over 10 theories he mentions from sunni scholars.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, skamran110 said:

I am mentioning the script and Arabic text and that has been protected by Allah swt.

Aaraabs were placed in the rule of Hjaj bin yusuf. 

Are you trying to avoid the obvious questions regarding the negligence of the first two  caliphs in compilation of Quran?

 

I thought you were one of those Shias that believed that Ali (as) said that he is the dot under the Ba of Bismilah. So, you are of the opinion that Ali (as) wrote down the Quran without dots? 

 

The Quran was collected in the time of Abu Bakr (ra). As I have said, the companions had different Qurans. The assumption that you are making is that the one that was relied upon was the Mus-haf of Ali (as).

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, iraqi_shia said:

You are gravely mistaken.

You only quote the sections where he is highlighting the massive errors of the sunni view. The later chapters explain his views. Eg your quoting chapters of "examining the reading", in which he highlights the issues of the sunni view. Next chapter is about 7 harfs, then protection from tahrif, then it discusses the shia position of collection of quran vs sunni position.

In short, he is saying the Shia believe compilation during the Prophets SAW lifetime, and he is not criticising the hafs content, but the notion that it was actually formulated at the time of hafs. He argues that it was already collected by then.

 

I would like you to confirm my understanding of what you just said.

You've understood that Al Khoei believes that the Quran was revealed in one recitation, and that recitation was not known as the recitation of Hafs, until the time of Hafs, when the recitation was named after him.

Is this correct?

 

I also suggest you read http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa36.html

These are his opinion. He is refutation the recitations. He says that they all could have made mistakes. 

Here http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa37.html he expressed his doubt in the recitations again but admits that it is permissible to use them when reciting the Quran for prayer. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

 

Quote

The Quran was collected in the time of Abu Bakr (ra). As I have said, the companions had different Qurans. 

 

Which companions had different Qurans? And what happened  to the Quran's, that was compiled under Abu Bark and Umar supervision?  Furthermore, what happened to Uthmam during the regime of Abu Bakr and Umar when they were compiling the Quran in a book form, why was he not instrumental in this task? moreover, if the Quran was not being compiled to the way Uthmam understanding then why was he silent on this matter? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, submitter71 said:

Different recitations and words.

So surahs existed with different words between the demise of the Prophet and Caliph Uthman's compilation??? So for those 15-20 years, was Allah not protecting the Quran as he promised? What about the copy that Hz Hafsa kept? 

Are you seriously accusing the sahaba of changing the Quran?

10 hours ago, submitter71 said:

 

He only attacks the recitations of the Quran. To me, the recitations and the Quran are the same thing. Both are from Allah azza wa jal.

Of course, anyone who believes that the recitation of Hafs from Asim is from Allah azza wa jal will strongly disagree with Al Khoei. 

How can recitation be from Allah? Did someone hear Allah? Are you using the correct word?

5 hours ago, submitter71 said:

 

It seems like you are not aware of what you are quoting brother. I checked out some of the references that you quoted, like Dhahabi and Al Haythami, and they both quote the narrator saying that the Quran collected by Ali (as) is not the same as the Quran today and that it was in order of revelation. 

So, even if we accept this report, then it still proves that the Quran that we rely on today is through the efforts of Uthman (ra). 

Brother - read the Quran once in order of revelation and see how easy it is to understnad and how well it lays out everything. Overall, by revelation or by length doesnt matter since it is still the Word of Allah. However, reading it by revelation makes more sense.

4 hours ago, submitter71 said:

 

You are making many assumptions brother. 

Did the Mus-haf of Ali (as) have dotting and diacritical marks? 

Perhaps it did, perhaps not. But Imam Ali established the rules that is for sure.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, power said:

Which companions had different Qurans? And what happened  to the Quran's, that was compiled under Abu Bark and Umar supervision?  Furthermore, what happened to Uthmam during the regime of Abu Bakr and Umar when they were compiling the Quran in a book form, why was he not instrumental in this task? moreover, if the Quran was not being compiled to the way Uthmam understanding then why was he silent on this matter? 

 

Brother, inshallah I will only answer the relevant questions. This thread is turning into a FAQs instead of focusing on the main issue of who is responsible for Quranic preservation.

The assumption that every companion had the exact same Rasm in each of their Masahif is gullible, especially when we became aware that the words of the Quran were not written according to the way they sound. It is also obvious that there was not an agreed method of how to write words.

An example is the word نعمة. In Some places in the Quran, it is written as نعمت, like in 2:231. There are many examples of this. It shows that the Arabs did not have an agreed method of writing words, and that both were fine.

An example of words not being written according to their sounds is the Basmala. We write it based on the Uthmani Rasm of بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم. If you wanted to write it according to how it sounds, then it would be بسم اللاه ارحمان ارحيم.

With this is mind, writing methods can easily cause different versions of Masahif. 

What Uthman (ra) did was canonize the way the Quran was written. 

I can go into more detail inshallah, but I don't want the thread to be derailed. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

So surahs existed with different words between the demise of the Prophet and Caliph Uthman's compilation??? So for those 15-20 years, was Allah not protecting the Quran as he promised? What about the copy that Hz Hafsa kept? 

Are you seriously accusing the sahaba of changing the Quran

 

Nobody is saying that the Masahif of the companions were faulty. In one recitation, the word كالعهن المنفوش is recited as كالصوف المنفوش. Sunnis believe that the recitations are from Allah azza wa jal and the inclusion of the word صوف does not make the Quran unprotected. 

In other words, the Mushaf with Hafsa (ra) was correct, and so were the Masahif of Ali (as), Ubay (ra), Ibn Masood (ra), and obviously Uthman (ra).

Nobody is accusing anybody of changing the Quran.

 

42 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

How can recitation be from Allah? Did someone hear Allah? Are you using the correct word?

 

All Sunnis believe in multiple recitations from Allah azza wa jal. It doesn't matter if they believe that Allah azza wa jal can be heard from or not. The belief is that these recitations were revealed by Allah azza wa jal.

 

44 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Brother - read the Quran once in order of revelation and see how easy it is to understnad and how well it lays out everything. Overall, by revelation or by length doesnt matter since it is still the Word of Allah. However, reading it by revelation makes more sense.

 

To read the Quran in order of revelation is impossible since there is no way of knowing the order of the chapters or verses since neither have been compiled in order of revelation. 

 

46 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Perhaps it did, perhaps not. But Imam Ali established the rules that is for sure.

 

Sunnis know enough about the Quran's history to hold the view that the Quran did not include dottings or diacritical marks. To claim that Ali (as) established the rules or canonized the way the Quran was written is only wishful thinking that is not based on any evidence. One of your Shia in the previous page even agreed that Ali's (as) Mus-haf was not used and he even quoted sources to support this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

 

Nobody is saying that the Masahif of the companions were faulty. In one recitation, the word كالعهن المنفوش is recited as كالصوف المنفوش. Sunnis believe that the recitations are from Allah azza wa jal and the inclusion of the word صوف does not make the Quran unprotected. 

In other words, the Mushaf with Hafsa (ra) was correct, and so were the Masahif of Ali (as), Ubay (ra), Ibn Masood (ra), and obviously Uthman (ra).

Nobody is accusing anybody of changing the Quran.

 

 

All Sunnis believe in multiple recitations from Allah azza wa jal. It doesn't matter if they believe that Allah azza wa jal can be heard from or not. The belief is that these recitations were revealed by Allah azza wa jal.

Why would 1 Allah give 7 harfs? I believe 1 misplaced word, 1 added word, 1 deleted word would render the Quran faulty. You dont believe this?

44 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

To read the Quran in order of revelation is impossible since there is no way of knowing the order of the chapters or verses since neither have been compiled in order of revelation. 

This is what use:

https://www.missionislam.com/quran/revealationorder.htm

Are you saying that Caliph Uthman complied the order of the verses in each surah and also the ordering of surahs?

47 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

Sunnis know enough about the Quran's history to hold the view that the Quran did not include dottings or diacritical marks. To claim that Ali (as) established the rules or canonized the way the Quran was written is only wishful thinking that is not based on any evidence. One of your Shia in the previous page even agreed that Ali's (as) Mus-haf was not used and he even quoted sources to support this. 

Agreed that the original Quran did not contain dottings and diacritical marks. Neither am I saying that Imam Ali's mushaf did. However, is it beyond reason to admit that these markings and rules were added during the reign of Imam Ali as Caliph? Is it not your belief that Imam Ali established rules for Arabic grammar and this was included in it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

This is what use:

https://www.missionislam.com/quran/revealationorder.htm

Are you saying that Caliph Uthman complied the order of the verses in each surah and also the ordering of surahs?

 

Uthman (ra) did not re-order the verses. This was done by the Prophet salalahu alaihi wa salam according to our authentic hadiths. 

What is the source of this website? Something so specific cannot be from a 21st century webmaster. 

 

7 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

However, is it beyond reason to admit that these markings and rules were added during the reign of Imam Ali as Caliph? Is it not your belief that Imam Ali established rules for Arabic grammar and this was included in it?

 

It has no historical evidence. That is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

 

Uthman (ra) did not re-order the verses. This was done by the Prophet salalahu alaihi wa salam according to our authentic hadiths. 

Ok, we are in agreement then. ALso, then we agree that all Caliph Uthman did was select the order of the surahs in the Quran, correct?

5 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

What is the source of this website? Something so specific cannot be from a 21st century webmaster. 

I am not sure but I dont think it is a shia site if that is what you are alluding. There are plenty of other sites with similar listings.

Try this:

https://*************wiki/Chronological_Order_of_the_Qur'an

 

5 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

It has no historical evidence. That is all.

Inshallah we will work on this.

Edited by shiaman14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Ok, we are in agreement then. ALso, then we agree that all Caliph Uthman did was select the order of the surahs in the Quran, correct?

 

We believe that he wrote the Quran in a specific writing style and canonized it by destroying other copies. This is much more significant than rearranging chapters. 

It makes no sense to believe that he destroyed other Qurans simply because they had a different order of chapters.

 

13 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

I am not sure but I dont think it is a shia site if that is what you are alluding. There are plenty of other sites with similar listings.

Try this:

https://*************wiki/Chronological_Order_of_the_Qur'an

 

I have no doubt that it is not a Shia site because Shias do not having access to such knowledge in the first place. All information of what was revealed in Makkah or Madinah is based on Sunni reports, often by Ibn Abbas (ra) or his students.

I see that the source given is Al Zinjani who barely died a hundred years ago. This is not a reliable source for such knowledge. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, shiaman14 said:

Inshallah we will work on this.

 

I will be looking forward to this. I am open to Shia narrations as well. I don't recall seeing much of these either. I have seen Shia hadiths agree with the Sunni view of Uthman (ra) compiling the Quran, however, they condemn him for destroying other Qurans. 

I do not recall much about Ali (ra) canonizing the Quran at all though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, submitter71 said:

I have no doubt that it is not a Shia site because Shias do not having access to such knowledge in the first place. All information of what was revealed in Makkah or Madinah is based on Sunni reports, often by Ibn Abbas (ra) or his students.

Whattttt!!! This is shocking. You mean the same sources which are usually looked down and ridiculed, and the reliability of the authors of those books question by Shias?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, submitter71 said:

The Quran was collected in the time of Abu Bakr (ra). As I have said, the companions had different Qurans. The assumption that you are making is that the one that was relied upon was the Mus-haf of Ali (as).

 

The quran was collected in the rule of Abubakr but this was not distributed in his rule. nor Umar rule. they complexity neglected this responsibility they have also rejected the quran compiled by Imam Ali AS.

Why were the two early not capable of collecting, shaping into one book and distributing it?

The question is not being addressed yet the claim is we should ask from your side about the compilation of quran.

WS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, skamran110 said:

 

The quran was collected in the rule of Abubakr but this was not distributed in his rule. nor Umar rule. they complexity neglected this responsibility they have also rejected the quran compiled by Imam Ali AS.

Why were the two early not capable of collecting, shaping into one book and distributing it?

The question is not being addressed yet the claim is we should ask from your side about the compilation of quran.

WS.

 

 

Abu Bakr (ra) and Omar (ra) did not canonize it the Mus-haf that they collected.

Is this an admission by you that Uthman (ra) did?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

Abu Bakr (ra) and Omar (ra) did not canonize it the Mus-haf that they collected.

Is this an admission by you that Uthman (ra) did?

So it is confined that the quran was not collected, shaped and distributed in the Muslim ummah by the two early caliphs. and they made a major sin of keeping the ummah devoid  of book of Allah swt.

Thanks for acceptance.

If the third one from the people chosen did it it finally it does not mean that he was not a part of those neglecting the  important task of quran by these people chosen caliphs. He had equal share in making this major sin.

WS

 

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, skamran110 said:

So it is confined that the quran was not collected, shaped and distributed in the Muslim ummah by the two early caliphs. and they made a major sin of keeping the ummah devoid  of book of Allah swt.

Thanks for acceptance.

If the third one from the people chosen did it it finally it does not mean that he was not a part of those neglecting the  important task of quran by these people chosen caliphs. He had equal share in making this major sin.

WS

 

 

Is this an admission by you that Uthman (ra) did it eventually? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, submitter71 said:

 

Is this an admission by you that Uthman (ra) did it eventually? 

 
  •  

If the third one from the people chosen had to do it  finally it does not mean that he was not a part of those neglecting the  important task of quran by these people chosen caliphs. He had equal share in making this major sin.

Thanks for  acceptance the part of major sin he made in the team of people chosen caliph .

Also he reached what he deserved by the action of those people for which he made a sin keeping them devoid of their rights to get the Book of Allah. swt..

WS

Edited by skamran110

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, submitter71 said:

 

I would like you to confirm my understanding of what you just said.

You've understood that Al Khoei believes that the Quran was revealed in one recitation, and that recitation was not known as the recitation of Hafs, until the time of Hafs, when the recitation was named after him.

Is this correct?

 

I also suggest you read http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa36.html

These are his opinion. He is refutation the recitations. He says that they all could have made mistakes. 

Here http://www.shiaweb.org/quran/bayan/pa37.html he expressed his doubt in the recitations again but admits that it is permissible to use them when reciting the Quran for prayer. 

 

 

No, I think you have misunderstood. He does not accept the whole notion of "recitations". Like I said, you need to read the later chapters, especially the one on the "collection of the Quran". You seem to be confusing Ayatallah Khuei criticism of the sunni narrative as criticism of the Quran itself. The earlier chapters are critical of the sunni theory, and the later ones are his own views.

There is just one Quran, with one set of wording and pronunciation. He disagrees with such a concept because there premises are flawed and contradictory, as I have already pointed out. He states that the Quran was revealed and compiled and authenticated during the lifetime of the Prophet SAW. He gives pages of evidence for this.

For example, he says why should I accept more than one quran when the reasons given for having more than one are contradictory and illogical? He critices the sources of the theories as well, which Im sure your not keen to discuss.

Also, our ideology is based on the completeness and perfection of the Quran, there is no room for the sunni theory of multiple qurans with varying words. 

Ayatalloh Khuie makes the point that we believe the Prophet SAW 100% when he said that he leaves two important things for guidance, the book of Allah and his Ahl Bayt. 

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...