Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
ShiaChat.com
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Why did Umar say the Quran was incomplete?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Al-Bukhari recorded in his Sahih (authentic), part eight, pages 209-210, that Ibn 'Abbas reported that 'Umar bin al-Khattab said in a discourse which he delivered during the last year of his caliphate:

"Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with the truth, and revealed to him the Book. One of the revelations which came to him was the verse of stoning. We read it and understood it.

"The Messenger of God stoned and we stoned after him. I am concerned that if time goes on, someone may say, 'By God, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of God;' thus, the Muslims will deviate by neglecting a commandment the Almighty revealed.

"Stoning is in the Book of God. It is the right punishment for a person who commits adultery if the required witnesses are available, or there was pregnancy without marriage or adultery is admitted."

Again, we used to read in the what we found in the Book of God:

"Do not deny the fatherhood of your fathers in contempt because it is disbelief on your part to be ashamed of the fatherhood of your fathers."

Similar reports were recorded by Imam Ahmad in part one of his Musnad (in the Musnad of 'Umar under the caption of the Hadith al-Saqifah, pages 47 and 55). Ibn Hisham recorded similar things in his Seerah of the Prophet. part 2, page 658 (second printing, 1955).

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 nursings would make the woman 'haram' (forbidden) to the child. The this verse was replaced by 'five known nursings' to make the woman forbidden to the child. The Prophet died while these words were recorded and read in the Qur'an."

'Umar Said Chapter 33 Is Incomplete

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.

Edited by phknrocket1k
Link to post
Share on other sites

Salam,

Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with the truth, and revealed to him the Book. One of the revelations which came to him was the verse of stoning. We read it and understood it.

"The Messenger of God stoned and we stoned after him. I am concerned that if time goes on, someone may say, 'By God, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of God;' thus, the Muslims will deviate by neglecting a commandment the Almighty revealed.

"Stoning is in the Book of God. It is the right punishment for a person who commits adultery if the required witnesses are available, or there was pregnancy without marriage or adultery is admitted."

This hadith comes in many narrations. Our examination of it, like that of any hadith, must necessarily involve both the asanid and the contents of its various narrations. This examination shows that this hadith is a gharib[1] hadith with “hidden defects”[2] and therefore according to established criteria of the science of Hadith is not reliable.

NARRATIONS’ ASANID

Below is a list of all the asanid that my search of the Hadith Encyclopedia for the narrations of ‘Umar’s hadith produced. In this list a later narrator is written first. The asanid having in common the same narrators in the first few generations are grouped together with names of common narrators indicated in color once at the end of the group. Other narrators common in asanid are also shown in color.

Malik 1295 --

Darimi 2219 – Khalid bin Makhlad – Malik --

Ahmad 265 – ‘Abd al-Rahman – Malik –

Ahmad 368 – Ishaq bin ‘Isa al-Tabba‘ – Malik --

Bukhari 6327 – ‘Ali bin ‘Abd Allah – Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah –

Muslim 3201 (note) – Zahir bin Harb -- Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah –

– Muhammad bin Yahya – Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah –

– Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah – Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah –

Ibn Majah 2543 – Abu Bakr bin Abi Shaybah – Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah –

-- Muhammad bin Sabbah --Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah –

Muslim 3201 --Ahmad bin ‘Amr -- ‘Abd Allah – Yunus bin Yazid –

-- Harmalah bin Yahya --‘Abd Allah – Yunus bin Yazid –

Bukhari 6778 – Musa bin Isma‘il – ‘Abd al-Wahid – Ma ‘mar –

Tirmidhi 1352 – Salamah bin Shabib – Ma‘mar –

--Ishaq bin Mansur – Ma‘mar –

--Al-Hasan bin ‘Ali – Ma‘mar –

Ahmad 313 -- ‘Abd al-Razzaq -- Ma‘mar –

Bukhari 6328 – ‘Abd al-‘Aziz bin ‘Abd Allah – Ibrahim bin Sa‘d – Salih –

Abu Da`ud 3835 – ‘Abd Allah bin Muhammad al-Nufayli – Hushaym --

Ibn Shihab – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn ‘Abbas [‘Ubayd Allah’s full name is ‘Ubayd Allah bin ‘Abd Allah bin ‘Utbah bin Mas‘ud (d. 98)]

Ibn Ishaq -- ‘Abd Allah bin Abi Bakr –

Ahmad 192 – Hushaym –

Ibn Shihab – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn ‘Abbas – ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘‘Awf

Ahmad 333- Muhammad bin Ja‘far – Shu‘bah –

Hajjaj – Shu‘bah –

Sa‘d bin Ibrahim – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn ‘Abbas – ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘Awf

Ahmad 151-- Hushaym –

‘Ali bin Zayd -- Yusuf bin Mihran -- Ibn ‘Abbas

Malik 1297 –

Ahmad 241—Yahya bin Sa‘id bin Farukh --

Ahmad 285—Yazid –

Yahya bin Sa‘id bin Qays -- Ibn al-Musayyab

Tirmidhi 1351– Ahmad bin Mani‘ – Ishaq bin Yusuf al-Azraq –

Da`ud bin Abi Hind -- Ibn al-Musayyab

From the above list we see:

n Four fourth-generation narrators, Malik, Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah, Yunus bin Yazid, and Ma‘mar can be reached with multiple chains of transmitters and each of these four narrators quote the hadith from al-Zuhri with the same isnad. Hence ‘Umar’s hadith can be taken back to Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri with a very high degree of confidence.

n All narrations from Ibn Shihab quote ‘Ubayd Allah bin ‘Abd Allah bin ‘Utbah, a Successor.

n Only in one narration someone other than Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri quotes ‘Ubayd Allah. This is Sa‘d bin Ibrahim (d. 125) in Musnad Ahmad (333). But, as we shall see, there is some evidence that Ahmad 192 also came from this same narrator, who was by mistake replaced by al-Zuhri. If so, there is some probability that Sa‘d bin Ibrahim also narrated ‘Umar’s hadith.

n Three asanid also reach Yahya bin Sa‘id who narrates the hadith from Ibn al-Musayyab, a Successor. Another third-generation narrator Da`ud bin Abi Hind is also said to narrate it from Ibn al-Musayyab, making it probable that Ibn al-Musayyab too transmitted the tradition. But Ibn al-Musayyab did not hear[3] ‘Umar and even the narrations attributed to him do not pretend that he had first hand knowledge of ‘Umar’s hadith.

n There is one narration in Musnad Ahmad (151) with an isnad independent of Ibn Shihab, Sa‘d bin Ibrahim, ‘Ubayd Allah, and Ibn al-Musayyab. It is narrated from Yusuf bin Mihran about whom we know next to nothing, which, together with other facts to be presented later, makes it much weaker than the other narrations. We can use it only to corroborate conclusions based on other narrations.

In view of the above comments, there is almost complete certainty that ‘Umar’s hadith was transmitted by Ibn Shihab (d. 125), who belongs to the third[4] generation of narrators. There is also some probability that two Successors Ibn al-Musayyab (d. 93) and ‘Ubayd Allah bin ‘Abd Allah bin ‘Utbah (d. 98) narrated the hadith.

When we move back in time to the Companions, things become very uncertain. In many narrations ‘Ubayd Allah transmits the tradition from Ibn ‘Abbas as if Ibn ‘Abbas himself was the witness to ‘Umar’s khutbah. However, in two narrations Ibn ‘Abbas narrates the tradition on the authority of ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘Awf as follows:

Ahmad 192 – Hushaym –

Ibn Shihab – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn ‘Abbas – ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘‘Awf

Ahmad 333- Muhammad bin Ja ‘far – Shu ‘bah –

Hajjaj – Shu ‘bah –

Sa‘d bin Ibrahim – ‘Ubayd Allah – Ibn ‘Abbas – ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘‘Awf

In Ibn Ishaq also Ibn ‘Abbas mentions “‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘Awf informed me”, although Ibn ‘Abbas himself is the speaker in his narration.

Even if we ignore the confusion between the role of Ibn ‘Abbas and ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘Awf in the transmission of the hadith, it remains problematic that only one of these two transmitted the tradition. According to many narrations ‘Umar spoke in a public khutbah that must have been attended by a large number of Muslims including numerous Companions. Why then it is only one person in the whole gathering who has transmitted the tradition to us? We could attribute this to chance except that exactly the same problem arises in the second and third generations. Numerous Successors have transmitted traditions from Ibn ‘Abbas. Why only ‘Ubayd Allah bin ‘Abd Allah bin ‘Utbah and an unknown narrator Yusuf bin Mihran transmit this tradition from him? ‘Ubayd Allah himself had at least 22 known students. Why only Ibn Shihab, and possibly Sa‘d bin Ibrahim transmit from him? Why do we not see several asanid reaching ‘Ubayd Allah, Ibn ‘Abbas and ‘Umar like we see several asanid reaching Sufyan, Ma‘mar, and Ibn Shihab?

It is true that as time passes a tradition gets spread and more and more narrators transmit it. But still at the earlier stages of transmission we should expect some mulitiplicity of transmitters, especially in case of a tradition that reports a public address by the leader of the whole Muslim world on a matter of some religious importance.

It is also very strange that ‘Umar remains the only Companion to talk about the stoning verse in a vast majority of books. This fact strongly suggests that for quite sometime the stoning verse and ‘Umar were uniquely tied to each other. Indeed, in one of the traditions it is assumed that ‘Umar was the only one who knew about the stoning verse:

[it is reported by] Ibn Abi Shaybah, concerning al-masahif, from al-Layth bin Sa‘d who said: The first to collect the Qur`an was Abu Bakr and Zayd bin Thabit wrote it. And people came to Zayd bin Thabit (with the portions of the Qur`an) but Zayd did not write anything (in the Qur`an) except with the testimony of two reliable witnesses. The last part of Surah Bara`ah was not found except with Khuzaymah bin Thabit. He said, “Write it, for the Messenger of God had declared the testimony of Khuzaymah equivalent to that of two men.” So he wrote it. And ‘Umar came with the verse of stoning but Zayd would not write it because ‘Umar was alone (in his testimony) (Al-Suyuti as quoted in ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud 3130)

According to this story, in the time of Abu Bakr when the Qur`an was reportedly collected no one knew about the stoning verse or no one remembered it except ‘Umar. This story is absent from all of the nine collections of Hadith covered in the Hadith Encyclopedia and does not even have complete isnad. Furthermore, as we shall see later it is in conflict with several other stories. There is therefore no likelihood that it is telling us an historical incident. Yet even fictions have some history in them. In this story, the history is that even in the time of Layth bin Sa‘d (d. 175) it was assumed by some narrators of ahadith that traditions about the stoning verse all went back only to ‘Umar: no other Companion talked about the verse. This is a powerful argument against the very idea of a stoning verse, since such a verse or, at least its existence, is expected to be known to a large number of senior Companions.

Our examination of the asanid of ‘Umar’s hadith suggests the approximate time when the hadith was fabricated: As noted above the asanid show that the hadith can be take back with some probability only to the time of ‘Ubayd Allah and Ibn al-Musayyab. Now both of these Successors died in or after 93 and those who transmitted from them -- al-Zuhri, Yahya bin Sa‘id etc -- died in or after 124. ‘Ubayd Allah and Ibn al-Musayyab therefore could not have transmitted the hadith to the third-generation narrators too much earlier than 75. If we allow a couple of decades for the hadith to gain wide enough circulation for ‘Ubayd Allah and Ibn al-Musayyab to start quoting it, then we can date it somewhere between 50-80.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
'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.

(salam)

If anyone makes this statement in this present day&age, you will have a fatwa on your head. :squeez: This statement is extremelly blasphemous in nature. :wacko: Just ask our "friend" from KFC...they call Shias kafir for believing that Al-Quran is incomplete ..But no Shias in this world has ever doubt the completeness of Al-Quran....

except perhaps Umar Al-Khattab(ref above)..But I was told that Umar is not a Shia? :unsure:

Edited by Zareen
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member

(salam)

there is a difference between

ta'weel, tanzeel and mansookh

Whats the difference? and which one is in the Quran?.. I know a couple of sunnis who say that everything that was revealed to the Prophet(saww) is in the Quran.. maybe they don't know.. or maybe this is one of the sunni belief as well... please clarify which one is ture.. wassalaamun alaikum

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.

×
×
  • Create New...