ANSWERING QURANIC TAHREEF ALLEGATIONS
AGAINST SHIA

Authored by:
ShiaOfAhlulbayt

http://groups.msn.com/shiaofahlulbayt

Bismillah al Rahman Al Raheem 
Inna Lillahi Wa Inna Ilayhi Rajioon

Allahumma Salle Ala Mohammadin Wa Aal e Mohammad
Wa Ajjil Farajahum Wa Ahlik Aduwwahum al Naasibeen Min al Awwaleen wal Akhireen

Wa Lanatullahi ala Qawm al Zalimeen

And the word of your Lord has been accomplished truly and justly; there is none who can change His words, and He is the Hearing, the Knowing. (Quran 6:115)
 

And when Our clear communications are recited to them, those who hope not for Our meeting say: Bring a Quran other than this or change it. Say: It does not beseem me that I should change it of myself; I follow naught but what is revealed to me; surely I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the punishment of a mighty day. ( Quran10:15)
 

They shall have good news in this world's life and in the hereafter; there is no changing the words of Allah; that is the mighty achievement. (Quran 10:64)




Much has already been said about Shi’ites’ attitude towards the lie/accusation of Qur’anic corruption and the authenticity of the Qur’an. Some Sunnis have emotionally discussed this issue and taken it as an opportunity to discredit the Shi’ites’ beliefs and accuse them of disbelief (kufr). They quote out of context or false reports from hadith or academic literature or sometimes deliberately misquote/mistranslate material to achieve this fitnah with which they choose to divide muslims who are innocent and from other sects.

This extreme sunni/salafi/wahabi attack focusses either on the shi'ite scholars and their edicts on Quran or revolves around  reports/narrations/hadiths as found in the books of the shi'ites. Instead of analysing these reports and their authenticity and reading the mainstream shi'ite clergy fatwas regarding this whole matter, the anti shia polemic chooses to just quote the reports and paint the picture of shi'ites as people who disbeleive in Quran, a lie, which we shall uncover through this document.

Owing to existing hate and bias against shi'ites, these reports led to severe criticism of Shi’ites and their beliefs. Some Sunni extremists have issued verdicts (fatawa) that they are unbelievers

Sunni References: Read for example "Al-Khutout-ul-'Arida lel-Usoul Allati Qam 'Alaiha Din-ush-Shi'ah Al-Imamiyyah" by Muhib-ud-Din Al-Khatib. Also Ihsan Ilahi Zhahir, "Ash-Shi'ah wa Al-Qur'an", pages 92 and 133.

However, we find it necessary - out of scientific honesty and as Muslims - to display the accurate shia belief concerning the issue of corruption of the Qur’an according to their own sources of utmost acceptance and authority and more importantly according to their understanding and interpretation to what is mentioned in these sources rather then mere copy pasting of traditions from one website over to the next.

Accusations against textual authenticity of the Qur’an were reported on authority of some Shi’ite scholars and even mentioned in some of their authoritative references which actually complicate the matter. For example, there are mentioned in “Al-Kafi” by Al-Kulaini, which is the most authoritative reference of traditions for Shia, a number of such traditions (which we shall explore shortly) which are questionable. A few examples of such traditions are:

Narration No. 1:

On authority of Abul-Hasan Ibn Madai that he said: Commander of Believers recited “O Messenger! proclaim the (Message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord concerning the Caliphate of Ali. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His Mission.” (Holy Qur’an 5:67), I said: is it revealed? He said: yes!

Shia Reference: Al Kafi by Al Kulaini, Volume 1, page 412

Narration No. 2:

It is also reported in “Al-Kafi” about the interpretation of “Bring me a Book (Revealed) before this, or any remnant of knowledge (ye may have)” (Holy Qur’an 64:4) that …

When Allah the Most High captured the soul of His Prophet (peace be upon him) and Fatima disputed about her heritage from God’s Messenger (peace be upon him), she deserted people for 75 days to write her Mushaf, so God sent her (Archangel) Gabriel until she wrote a Mushaf that includes the knowledge of what did, does and will take place till the Day of Resurrection

Shia Reference: Al Kafi by Al Kulaini, Chapter of "Mention of the Manuscript" in Volume 1, page 240. Also Chapter 89, Numbers 1, 2, 3 and 4 in Volume 1, page 344.

Narration No.3:

On authority of Muhammad Ibn Jahm Al-Hilali that Abu Abdullah said: “lest one party (ummah) should be more numerous than another (ummah)” (Holy Qur’an 16:92) in Surat-un-Nahl is not so; it is “lest Imams (a’immah) should be more pious than your Imams (a’immah)”

Shia Reference: Al Kafi by Al Kulaini, Vol.1, Chapter 92, Number 7

Shi’ite scholars, however, do not authenticate whatever is mentioned in “Al-Kafi” by Al-Kulaini nor do they elevate it to the position of “Sahih-ul-Bukhari” before Sunnis as lay people think. On the contrary, they say it contains so many traditions with weak and interrupted chains of transmitters. Sheikh Al-Muttaqi Al-Kulaini authored his book in 20 years writing on authority of whoever transmitted traditions; so it all depends on isnad (i.e., chain of transmitters) as Sunni Imam At-Tabari did when he mentioned his isnad and said: this is my isnad and whoever provides isnad cannot be blamed if he errs.

In a recent research by the Shi’ite researcher Hashem Al-Husseini, he asserts that:

All early scholars never agreed upon all traditions of Al-Kulaini wholly or in details.

Shia Reference: Hashem Ma'rouf Al-Husseini, in his book"Drasat fe Al-Hadith wa Al-Muhadithin", pages 132-134.

and:

Traditions of “Al-Kafi” that are 16199 in number including 5027 vigorously authentic (Sahih) ones, 144 well authentic (Hasan) ones, 1128 authenticated (Muwathaq) ones, 302 strong (Qawi) ones and 9480 weak (Da’eef) ones.

Shia Reference: Hashem Ma'rouf Al-Husseini, in his book"Drasat fe Al-Hadith wa Al-Muhadithin", pages 137

Authenticated tradition (Al-Muwathaq) is that which is transmitted by someone authenticated by Shi’ite specialists in spite of his flawed beliefs and no falsehood is related by him. Strong tradition (Al-Qawi) is that which has continuous chain of non-Shi’ite transmitters who are neither authenticated nor criticized by Shi’ite Imams.

Shia Reference: Muhyy-d-Din Al-Mosawi Al-Gharifi, in "Qawa'ed-ul-Hadith", page 24

Shi’ite critics have examined the traditions of corruption of the Qur’an in “Al-Kafi” and found them to be 300 ones transmitted by four reporters: Abu ‘Ubaidullah As-Sayari, Yunis Ibn Zhubian, Mankhal Ibn Jamil Al-Kufi and Muhammad Ibn Hasan Ibn Jahour

Shia Reference: Sheikh Rasoul Ja'farian, "Ukthoubat Tahrif Al-Qur'an bain As-Sunnah wa Ash-Shi'ah", page 46.

The credibility of these four is null according to Shi’ite traditionists:

Al-Ghada’iri [1]said about As-Sayari:  He is weak, extremist and eccentric

Shia Reference: "Qamous-ur-Rijal", Volume 1, page 403

 

Sheikh An-Najashi [2]said about As-Sayari: He is weak in hadith and corrupted in belief.

Shia Reference: "Mu'jam Rijal-el-Hadith", Volume 3, page 290.



Sheikh An-Najashi said about Yunis Ibn Zhubian: He is very weak, all that he relates is not to be considered, all his books are but corruption.

Shia Reference: "Rijal-un-Najashi", page 838.

 

Al-Ghada’iri said about Yunis Ibn Zhubian: He is Kufi, extremist, liar and fabricator of hadith

Shia Reference: Al-Hilli, "Khulasat-ur-Rigal", page 266

As for Mankhal Ibn Jamil, Hashem Al-Huseini has related on authority of specialists in hadith transmitters that he is an eccentric extremist

Shia Reference: Hashem Al-Husseini, "Dirasat fe Al-Hadith wa Al-Muhaddithin", page 198

Lastly, the eminent scholar Ibn-ul-Muttahir Al-Hilli [3] said about Muhammad Ibn Hasan Ibn Jahour:

He is weak in hadith, extremist in belief and corrupted in narration, his traditions are neither considered nor reliable.

Shia Reference: Al-Hilli, "Khulasat-ur-Rijal", page 251.



Therefore, the Shi'ite agreement on unreliability of these reporters indicates their innocence from this awful charge (i.e that shia beleive in tahreef in Quran) against them. Presence of these reports in “Al-Kafi” is conditioned with their authenticity which is not established as we have demonstrated from Shi'ite sources themselves.

It is reported on authority of so many Shi’ite Scholars that they have refuted the lie of corruption of the Qur’an, so we quote them here:

The eminent theologian Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn ‘Ali Ibn Babwai Al-Qummi [4] known as the Truthful (As-Sadouq) (died 381 A.H.) states:

Our belief is that the Qur’an is what is between the two covers and it is what is in people’s hands, nothing more. Whosoever attributes to us that we say rather than this is a Liar.

Shia Reference: Sheikh As-Sadouq, "Al-I'tiqadat", Volume 1, page 57

As-Sayyed Al-Murtada ‘Ali Ibn Al-Hussein Al-Moosavi Al-‘Aalvi (died 436 A.H.) [5] stated:

The knowledge of authentic transmission of the Qur’an is like the knowledge of great countries and events, prominent accidents, famous books and written Arabic poetry for care is intensified and causes are available to properly transmit and guard it, and it reached such an extent that nothing else has ever reached.

The Qur’an was, during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him), compiled and arranged until the Prophet (peace be upon him) assigned a group of Companions (Sahaba) to memorize it. It was displayed and recited before the Prophet (peace be upon him) and some Companions as Abdullah Ibn Mas’ood and Ubai Ibn Ka’b recited the whole Qur’an many times before the Prophet (peace be upon him). All this indicates that it was compiled and arranged, neither amputated nor scattered …….

Who disagreed among the Imamiyyah and Al-Hashawiyyah (two Shi’ite sects) are not to be considered for disagreement is attributed to some traditionists who related weak reports whom they believed to be true. However, such reports cannot refute what is already known and agreed upon its authenticity

Shia Reference: At-Tabarasi, "Majma'-ul-Bayan", Volume 1, page 15.

Sheikh Abu ‘Ali At-Tabarasi [6], the author of the famous Tafsir known as “Majma’-ul-Bayan”, stated:

Concerning the talk about the Qur’an being increased and decreased, increasing is agreed upon its falsehood. As for decreasing, it was reported on authority of some of our folks and some of Al-Hashawiyyah that the Qur’an involves change and decrease. But the opposite is true and this is affirmed by Al-Murtada, may Allah bless his soul

Shia Reference: At-Tabarasi, "Majma'-ul-Bayan", Volume 1, page 15

Now we leave the last word in this to Sheikh-ut-Ta’ifa (i.e., Authority of the Sect) Abu Ja’far Muhammad Ibn Al-Hasan At-Tusi (died 461 A.H.) [7], he summarizes the Shi’ite belief in textual authenticity of the Qur’an and the reason why that rumor was said about them, he states:

Talking about it being increased or decreased is unacceptable because increasing is agreed upon its falsehood. As for decreasing, different Muslim sects are apparently against it and this matches the authentic belief of our sect and was affirmed by Al-Murtada (may Allah be pleased with him). This is explicit in various reports, however, some reports were related about decreasing parts of it and moving parts from place to place, but they are loner reports and do not indicate decisive knowledge. So, it prior to ignore them and quit being preoccupied with them because they cannot be interpreted. Even if they were authentic, it would not be against what is between the two covers for its authenticity is well known and none among the Ummah objects to or rejects it. Our reports agree upon reading it, holding by it and displaying any disagreement in branches before it, whatever agrees with it is accepted and whatever disagrees is rejected. An irrefutable tradition is reported on authority of the Prophet (peace be upon him) that he says: “I’m leaving in you the two weights (Ath-Thuqlain) by whom if you hold by, you will never be lost: Allah’s Book and my family, the inhabitants of my house. They will never separate till they join me in the Hawd”. This indicates that it is present every time because he cannot command us to hold by it if it is corrupted.

Shia Reference: "Tafsir-us-Safi", Volume 1, page 55

The author of “Kashf-ul-Irtiyab fe Radd Fasl-el-Khitab” (i.e., Exposing Suspicion in Answering the Decisive Speech) has transmitted a group of quotations by eminent Shi’ite Imams concerning the textual authenticity of the Qur’an, he quotes

the following Imams / scholars (non infallibles):

- Abu Ja’far Ibn Babwai Al-Qumi (died 381 A.H.)
- As-Sayyid Al-Murtada ‘Ali Al-Mosawi (died 436 A.H.)
- Sheikh-ul-Ta’fa (i.e., Authority of the Sect) At-Tusi (died 461 A.H.)
- Abu ‘Ali At-Tabarasi (died 548 A.H.)
- As-Sayyid Ibn Tawous (died 644 A.H.)
- Mullah Muhsin-ul-Fayd Al-Kashani (died 1091 A.H.)
- Muhammad Baha’-ud-Din Al-‘Amili Al-Baha’i (died 1104 A.H.)
- The critical scholar Zain-ud-Din Al-Bayadi.
- The Jurist Sayyid Noorullah At-Tasturi.

Shia Reference: “Kashf-ul-Irtiyab fe Radd Fasl-el-Khitab”, page 57.

 

in addition to a number of contemporary Shi’ite scholars and authorities such as Kashif Al-Ghatta’, Muhammad Jawad Al-Balaghi, Mahdi At-Tabataba’i, Muhsin al-Amin Al-‘Amili, Muhammad Mahdi Shirazi, Shihab-ud-Din An-Najafi Mar’ashi, Abdul-Hussein Sharaf-ud-Din Al-‘Amili, Muhammad Rida al-Gulpaygani, Ayatullah Al-Khomeini and many many others to prove the same point that within the imamiya ithna ashariya shia community (12 imam following shia) there is an absolute ijma with regards to the correctness, authenticity and infalliblity of the Holy Quran from the day of revelation till today.

Shia Reference: Rasoul Ja'farian, "Ukthoubat Tahrif Al-Qur'an", page 60
 

All great Twelver Shi'ah scholars from the earliest period to the present century have believed in the complete preservation of the Qur'an. Some famous early Shi'a scholars who have clearly stated this belief in their books include:

- Shaykh al-Saduq (d. 381 AH), Kitabu'l-Itiqadat, (Tehran, 1370) p. 63.

- Shaykh al-Mufid (d. 413 AH), Awa'ilu l-Maqalat, pp. 55-6;

- Sharif al-Murtada (d. 436 AH), Bahru 'l-Fawa'id (Tehran, 1314) p. 69;

- Shaykh at-Tusi (d. 460 AH), Tafsir at-Tibyan, (Najaf, 1376), vol 1 p. 3;

- Shaykh at-Tabrasi (d. 548), Majma'u 'l-Bayan, (Lebanon), vol. 1p. 15.

 

Some of the later scholars who spelt out the same views include:

- Muhammad Muhsin al-Fayd al-Kashani (d. 1019 AH), Al-Wafi, vol. 1, pp.273-4, and al-'Asfa fi Tafsir al-Qur'an, p. 348

- Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (d. 1111 AH), Bihar al-'Anwar, vol. 89 p. 75.

This belief has continued uninterrupted upto the present time. Shi'ah scholars of this century who have reiterated the belief that the Qur'an is completely protected and unchanged include such famous names as Sayyid Muhsin al-Amin, al-'Amili (d. 1371 AH); Sayyid Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi (d. 1377 AH.); Shaykh Muhammad Husayn Kashif al-Ghita' (d. 1373 AH); Sayyid Muhsin al-Hakim (d.1390 AH); 'Allamah al-Tabataba'i (d. 1402 AH); Sayyid Ruhullah al-Khumayni(d. 1409 AH); Sayyid Abual-Qasim al-Khu'i (d. 1413 AH) and Ayatollah Sayyid Muhammad Rida al-Gulpaygani (d. 1414 AH); Sayyid Ali Hussaini al Khamenei; Sayyed Ali Hussaini al Sistani, late Ayatollah Imam Syed Mohammad Shirazi and all other well known scholars from his family, Sayyed Mohammad Taqi al Modaressi and all other eminent scholars from the Modaressi family, Shaheed Ayatollah Baqir al Hakeem, Saeed al Hakeem and all other eminent scholars from Al Hakeem family, Shaheed Ayatollah Syed Mohammad Baqir al Sadr and Sayyid Sadiq al Sadr and all eminent scholars from the Al Sadr family, Ayatollah Sheikh Jawad Tabrezi, Ayatollah Syed Jafar Murtada al Amuli, Shaheed Ayatollah Murtada Muttahari, Ayatollah Jawad Amuli, Ayatollah Sheikh Jafar Sobhani, Ayatollah Sheikh Naser Makarem al Shirazi, Ayatollah Syed Kazim Raza al Haeri, Ayatollah Sayyed Ali Hussaini al Meelani and many many more.

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)"

Shia reference: The Beliefs of Shi'ite School, by Muhammad Ridha Mudhaffar, English version, pp 50-51
This is of course not an exhaustive list. If we include the names of all contemporary and late ayatollahs / scholars then this would go in hundreds..

Q: But what about the Shi'ah before these scholars, didn't they all believe in tahrif?

Not at all! Consider the example of 'Ubaydullah b. Musa al-'Absi (120-213 AH), a devoted Shi'a scholar whose narrations from the Imams can be found in the famous Shi'ah hadith collections such as al-Tahdhib and al-Istibsar. Now let's see what some Sunni scholars have to say about him:

"... a pious person, one of the important Shi'ah scholars ... he was considered reliable by Yahya b. Ma'in, Abu Hatim said he was reliable, trustworthy ...al-'Ijli said that he was an authority on the Qur'an..."

Sunni Reference: Al-Dhahabi, Tadhkirat al-Huffaz (Haydarabad, 1333 AH), vol. 1p. 322


And 'Ubaydullah was considered so trustworthy, despite being a Shi'a, that the famous Sunni traditionists al-Bukhari and Muslim as well as many others narrated scores of traditions from him in their hadith collections!

Sunni Reference: The Creed of the Imaam of Hadeeth al-Bukhari (Salafi Publications, UK, 1997), pp. 87-89
 

"... he was an imam in fiqh and hadith and Qur'an characterized by piety and righteousness, but he was one of the chiefs of the Shi'ah."

Sunni Reference: Ibn al-'Imad al-Hanbali, Shadharat al-Dhahab (Cairo, 1350 AH), vol. 2p. 29


None of these Sunni scholars would have praised him for his knowledge of the Qur'an if they thought he believed in a different Qur'an!!!


Online Reference: http://al-islam.org/nutshell/files/tahrif.pdf

 

REFUTATION OF ACCUSATIONS AGAINST SHIA SCHOLARS

Accusation No.1:

Al-Tabrassi  the most famous early scholar of shia writes in his book "Fasl ul Khitaab fi Isbaat Tahreef Kitaab Rabb ul Arbaab" (the title says it all....) that no one from the "old ones" agrees with them. (P. 34). Al Nuri al Tabrasi further writes that the style in Al-Tibyan by Al-Tusi clearly shows that it was only written in order "to go with the opponents"...in other words hypocrisy.

Shia Scholars like Imam Khomeini and Murtada Muttahari besides other greatly revere this scholar and his works. This  Khomeini also like other Ayatollahs authenticates "Dua e Sanam e Quraish" which implies Tahreef in Quran. Similarly Khomeini made statements about manipulations in Quran in his book "Kashf al Asraar"

 

Answer:

1- We already mentioned more then a few dozen shi'ite scholars spanning over 1000 years of shia scholarship.

You have got both your history and nomenclature wrong:

Firstly, The Tabrassi you are quoting is neither the most famous nor a very early scholar. There are three individuals with the title of Tabarsi among the Shi'a. The one you mentioned who wrote a booklet on the incompleteness of Quran, is al-Nuri al-Tabarsi (Husain Ibn Muhammad Taqi al-Nuri al-Tabarsi) (c 1254 AH/1838 - 1320 AH/1902). Those who call the Shi'a Kafir due to this booklet will be surprised if they know that many of the Hadiths that al-Nuri al-Tabarsi has quoted are, in fact, from the Sunni documents and were quoted from their most authentic books!

For a little sampling of the Sunni Traditions from their Sihah and other hadith books showing Tahreef in Quran, the reader is requested to click below and get prepared to be shocked:

Some Sunni Reports on the Incompleteness of Quran

Secondly, the name and contents of the book that you have quoted/suggested are both false. Sheikh Nuri neither beleived in Tahreef of Quran nor wrote a book with the alleged name you gave and what you have quoted is absolutely false and out of context from a westernized (filtered) and distorted version of his book (spread by non muslim countries to divide muslims). Rather then giving personal opinion we will quote authentic authorities on this subject:

What more could be better to quote then the eminent late Imam Ayatollah al Udhama Syed Mohammad Hussaini al Shirazi on this issue?

The following Question was asked to him:

Through my discussions with others it has been claimed that the Shi'a believe that the Qur'an we have today is not the complete Qur'an.  Not only that, but they believe, it was claimed, that the holy Qur'an has been corrupted.  A book, Fasl-il-Khitab fi Ithbat wa Tahreef al-Kitab, written by a prominent Shi'a scholar, al-Noori, was cited to prove their point, in which the author 'proves' the Qur'an has been corrupted!  It is this true?  Do the Shi'a believe that the holy Qur'an we have today is incomplete and corrupted?  And about the book mentioned above, what is your comment?  Is its author an odd one out amongst the Shi'a or does he represent a broad view of the Shi'a in this respect?

The late Imam / Grand Ayatollah replied to this accusation as follows:

Online Reference: http://www.shirazi.org.uk/the%20holy%20quran.htm

Unlike the Shia (who reject such traditions as false nor grade their books of ahadith in such bold manners), the sunnis have graded many such traditions as Sahih in their Sihah Sittah books along with the entire books! Our Sunni brethren's attitude towards such ahadith is influenced by their belief that the traditions of as-sihah as-Sittah (the six correct books of traditions), and especially those found in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are all correct. Imam an-Nawawi writes in Sharh Sahih Muslim:

"The fact that the ummah has willingly accepted [the Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim] has led us to the opinion that it is obligatory (wajib) to act on what is written in these two [books], and this is an unanimously agreed view. People are obliged to act on a khabaral-wahid (a hadith reported by a single narrator) found in other books only when its chain of narrators is correct; and even then it would not create but only a strong assumption. And the same applies to the two Sahihs; but these two differ from the other books in that all that is in these two is correct and there is no need to examine them; rather it is wajib to follow them unconditionally. But as for the ahadith in other books, they will not be followed until their credentials are checked and they are found to fulfil the conditions of a correct hadith."

This unconditional blanket acceptance of the ahadith found in these books has compelled our Sunni brothers to accept the theory of abrogation of recital (naskhut-tilawah); that is, they believe that recital of some verses was abrogated although the law contained in some of them continues. Two well-known examples of such supposed verses are the so-called verses of stoning (rajm) and of ten or five sucklings, which are found in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim and other books

Sunni References: For the verse of stoning. see Sahih al-Bukhari, vol 4. p 179. 265: Sahih Muslim,vol. 3. p. 1317: Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol 1 (Beirut: al-Maktab al-Islami. 1969) p. 40: Sunan Ibn Majah, vol. 2 (Cairo edition) p 853: Muwatta, Imam Malik, vol 2.p 623.For the verse of suckling, see: Sahih Muslim, vol. 4. p. 167: As-Suyuti, ad-Durru 'l-Manthur, vol. 2.

And the hadith of Sahih Muslim explicitly says:

"Ummu 'l-mu'minin 'Aisha said, "There was among what was revealed of the Qur'an (the verse) 'Ten known sucklings create prohibition' (i.e., foster relationship). Then it was abrogated by 'five sucklings', and the Messenger of Allah expired and they were among what was recited of the Qur'an."

Sunni References: Sahih Muslim, vol 1. p. 167: As-Suyuti, ad-Durru 'l-Manthur, vol2. p. 135


Ibn Majah has narrated another hadith from 'Aishah which explicitly says that the two verses were lost after the death of the Prophet. She is reported to say: 'The verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times were revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my bed. When the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.) expired and we were preoccupied with his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper'

Sunni References: Musnad Ahmad bin Hanbal. vol. 6. p. 269: Sunan Ibn Majah, p. 626: Ibn Qutbah, Tawil Mukhtalafi 'l-Hadith (Cairo: Maktaba al-Kulliyat al-Azhariyya. 1966) p. 310 which has been misprinted as 210-: As-Suyuti, ad-Durru 'l-Manthur, vol. 2. p. 13.


It needs no great intelligence to see that this theory of abrogation of recital cannot be of any use in such cases. If a surah or verse was recited in the life of the Prophet and then it was lost either because the reciters were killed in a battle, or because a goat devoured it or for any other reason, then the question arises: Who had the right to abrogate a Qur'anic verse after the Prophet's death? Had any other prophet come after Muhammad (peace be on him and his progeny)? That is why Ayatollah al Udhama Sayyid al-Khu'i r.a said:

"It is clear that the theory of abrogation of recital (naskhu 't-tilawah) is exactly the same as belief in alteration in and omission from the Qur'an."

Shia Reference: al Bayan , p. 224.

Going back to the original question, Al Nuri Tabrasi's book has two parts. In one part he has gathered the Sunni reports and in the other part he provided the Shi'a reports in this regard. The Wahhabis, who have recently distributed copies of this book to attack the Shi'a, have intentionally omitted the part related to the Sunni reports!

The other Tabrasi, i.e the one highly-acknowledged Tabarsi from the early times in the Shia world is yet another person. His name is Abu Ali al-Fadl Ibn al-Hasan al-Tabarsi (c 486/1093 -548/1154), who is one of the famous Imami traditionists and the commentators of Quran. His book on Tafsir is well-known. He believed in the completeness of Quran as other Shia scholars do. Abu Ali al-Tabarsi mentioned:


"There are no words added to the Quran. Any claim of added words is unanimously denied by the Shi'ites. As to the deletion, some Shi'ites and some Sunnis said that there is deletion. but Our scholars deny that."

Shia reference: Quoted from al-Tabarsi, in the Commentary of the Holy Quran, by al-Safi
Sunni reference: Quoted from al-Tabarsi, by Professor Muhammad Abu Zahrah in his book "Imam al-Sadiq".

First of all, Tabarsi has confirmed that nothing has been added in to the Quran (as opposed to some of the traditions in Sahih al-Bukhari which claim otherwise). Second, he has mentioned that our scholars (the Shia scholars) rejected the idea that anything has been deleted from the Quran. His saying clearly shows that the Shi'a scholars disagreed with any idea concerning that Quran is missing something. Thus the very small number of the traditions that might imply otherwise should have proper interpretation. Also as Tabarsi mentioned, such traditions which might imply deletion, are not exclusive to the Shi'ite books, and can be found in the most important Sunni collections of traditions such as Sahih Muslim and Sahih al-Bukhari.

Al Nuri Al Tabrasi has been SEVERLEY criticised by the shia ulama for his book which containted (from both shia and sunni side) hadiths which were ahad and have been shown to be weak.


As for criticisms of Fasl al Khitab, refer to:


‘Kashf al Irtiyab fi 3adm Tahrif al Kitab’ by Allamah Muhammad ibn Abi Qasim Al Tahrani

‘Hafth al Kitab AlS hareef 3an Shubhat al Qawl bil tahrif’ by Allamah Muhammad Husayn Al Shahrastany

‘Ala’ Arahman fi Tafsir Al Quran’ by Sheikh Al Balaghi


These are three books by eminent scholars that lived during the time of Al Nuri Al Tabrisi.


Another eminent Shia scholar Sayyid Hib al Din Al Shahrastany who also lived at that time narrates that:

When the book was published, there was not one hawza class that you went into where you would not find commotion and people in uproars severley criticising the book and the author. 

Shia Reference: Al Burhan, by Allamah al Burujirdy page 143.
 

Ayatollah al Udhama Imam khomeini r.a the great disciple of the school of Ahlulbayt a.s said about Muhadith Nuri:

"His books which are full of strong stories are more fun than reality. He, may God bless him, was a good and scholarly man except that his interest to collect weak traditions and his strange statements, which are not acceptable by common sense and reason, are more than his useful statements. It is surprising that his contemporaries neglegted and let something happen which must not have happened - something for which the heavens cry and it came to split the earth (it refers to the "faslul khitab").

Shia Reference: Anwarul Hedaya fi taliqat alal kefaya, first chapter, p244,5

So many books were written in islamic history (irrespective of sects), that in fact never express but the viewpoints of their writers and authors, containing the lean and strong, truth and falsehood, and implying wrong and correct. This fact includes all the Islamic sects, and is not confined to the Shi’ah alone. Are we permitted to hold Ahl al-Sunnah responsible for what was written by the Egyptian Culture Minister and dean of Arabic literature Dr. Taha Husayn regarding the Qur’an and pre-Islamic (Jahili) poetry? Or what al-Bukhari reported, which is considered veracious near them, about the presence of loss and addition in the Qur’àn, and so also is Sahih Muslim, and other sources?

Let’s turn aside from this and return good for evil. What an excellent words uttered in this regard, those said by the Sunni Professor Muhammad al-Midyani, Dean of al-Shari‘ah College in al-’Azhar University, when writing:

“And as regards the claims that the Imàmiyyah believe in presence of loss in the Qur’àn, I seek God’s protection... they are no more than narrations reported in their books, the like of which are reported in our books. The investigators from among both the sects have refuted them, proving their falsehood and fabrication. No one among the Imami Shi’ah or Zaydiyyah is ever believing in this, neither is there anyone among the Sunnis.

Anyone desiring to have more information can refer to most eminent Sunni Muhaddith / Mufassir Jalal al Din al-Suyuti’s book "al-’Itqan", in which he can see the likes of such narrations, of which we turned aside.

“In 1498, an Egyptian compiled a book calling it al-Furqàn, interpolating it with such poor, exotic and rejected narrations, reporting quotations (in their confirmation) from the Sunni books and references. Al-’Azhar then asked the Government to stop publication of (confiscate) the book, after demonstrating with scientific proof and argument the aspects of falsehood and deviation in it.The Government responded to this request and confiscated the book. Its author then filed a case demanding an indemnity, but the Administrative Judiciary in the State Cabinet dismissed the case.

“Should we say then that Ahl al-Sunnah deny the sanctity of the Qur’an? Or believe in presence of loss in the Qur’an due to a narration reported by so and so? Or due to a book compiled by so and so?

The same is true concerning the Imàmi Shi’ah, that reports can be found in their books similar to those recorded in some of our books (the speech to al-Midyani). Al-’Imàm al-‘Allàmah Abu al-Fadl ibn al-Hasan al-Tabrasi, an eminent Imàmi scholar in the 6th Hijrah Century, in his book Majma’ al-bayan li ‘ulum al-Qur’àn, says in this respect:

“There is consensus and unanimity among the Muslims that there is not any ‘excess’ in the holy Qur’àn. But with regard to the deficiency of the text of the holy Qur’àn, a group of Imàmiyyah and a group of Hashwiyyah who are Sunnis have claimed presence of atterations and deficiencies in the holy Qur’àn, but the true belief accepted by the Imàmiyyah holds otherwise. This is supported by al-Sayyid al-Murtada (may God sanctify his soul), giving it its full due in reply to the questions of al-Taràbulusiyyàt, saying in some places: Knowledge and certainty of the validity of the narration of the holy Qur’àn are like the knowledge and certainty on the existence of countries, cities, famous historical events, popular books, and the poems compiled by the Arabs. This is because the specific regard and attention and the strong motive for the narration of the text of the holy Qur’àn and its upkeeping had been much stronger than the precision and attention given to the above-cited items, since the Qur’àn being the miracle of Prophethood, source of legal sciences and religious rules. And Muslim ‘ulamà’ paid so great attention in preserving and safeguarding it, to the extent that they came to recognize all controversial things regading which disagreement was there, including its syntax (i‘ràb), readings, letters and verses. So how is it permissible to believe in its being altered, or decreased, with the presence of this sincere attention and strict precision.”

Sunni Reference: The article written by the Professor Muhammad al-Midyani, the dean of al-Shari'ah College in al-Jàmi' al-'Azhar, appeared in the journal Risàlat al-'Islàm, issue No. 4, the 11th year, pp. 382-383.

“Abu Musa al-‘Ash’ari sent for the qurra’ (reciters) of Basrah. Three hundred qurra’ of the Qur’àn came to him. He told them: “You are the elect of the people of Basrah’. He asked them to recite, which they did. (He told them): ‘Do not remain long without reciting the Qur’àn, lest your hearts, like those who went before you, should harden. Indeed we used to recite a surah similar in length and power to the Surat al-Barà’ah, which I forgot except for a single verse:

( لو كان لابن آدم واديان من مال لا بتغى واديا ثالثا ولا يملأ جوف ابن آدم الا التّراب )

We would also read a surah like one of the al-Musabbihit, which I forgot all except this:


( يا أيها الّذين آمنوا لم تقولون ما لا تفعلون فتكتب شهادة في أعناقكم فتسألون عنها يوم القيامة ) .

(meaning: O you who believe! Why say you that which you do not? Then it will be counted a testimony against you and you be answerable about it on the Day of Resurrection).

Sunni Reference: Sahih Muslim, Vol. III, p. 100, "bab law ann li-ibn Adam wadiyan la-ibtagha thalithan".


These two alleged surahs, which were forgotten both by Abu Musa al-‘Ash’ari, one resembling Surat al-Bara’ah, i.e. 129 verses, and the other resembling one of the Musabbihit, i.e. twenty verses, have both no existence except in the imagination of Abu Musà. It is really astonishing. I leave the judgement to the equitable reader.

When Ahl al-Sunnah’s books and Musnads and Sihah be replete with such reports, claiming once that the Qur’àn is incomplete, and increased another time, so what is the reason behind all this vilification against the Shi’ah who unanimously concurred on the invalidity of such claims.

And when the Shi’i man, the author of Fasl al-Khitab fi ithbat tahrif Kitab Rabb al-’Arbab, who died in 1320 Hijrah, had compiled his book about a hundred years ago, he was preceded by the Egyptian Sunni writer, the author of the book al-Furqan with about four centuries, as referred to by al-Shaykh Muhammad al-Midyani, the Dean of al-Shari‘ah College in Al-’Azhar University.

Sunni Reference: The Journal Risalat al-'Islam, issue No. 4, the 11th year, pp. 382, 383.

Furthermore, we will close this case of lies and slanderous allegations upon allegations against Sheikh al Nuri al Tabrasi by showing his own beleifs/words about quran as quoted by one of his greatest / reknowned students:

Late Allamah Sheikh Aqa Buzurg Tehrani the very eminent scholar and author of "Al-Zari3a ila Tasaanif ul Shia" and the disciple of Muhadeth Nuri states:

"Our master used to say late in his life that I made a mistake in choosing the tittle of the book. It was much better to call it." Faslul Khitab fi Adam Tahriful Kitab" because I prove in this Book that the Quran which is widely spread in the world with all suras and verse is a divine revelation and no change or addition or omission has occurred in it since it was collected. In several parts of the book i failed to insist my idea (strongly enough) to prevent others' blames and stated some points against my own real ideas neglectfully"

Shia Reference: Al-Zari3a ila Tasaanif ul Shia, vol 16 p 232.

Therefore it remains proven beyond doubt that al Nuri Tabrasi never himself beleived in tahrif of Quran and maintained that the quran was complete and that his book was only an academic compilation and analysis of all the traditions and stories from both shia and sunni side which allege the Tahreef of Quran along with some commentary. The reasons why the scholars from shia severely criticized him was not because Sheikh Nuri beleive in Tahreef himself but because he wrote a on an unnecessary topic which was full of controversial weak ahadith and could be used against Islam by anti islamic and divisive forces. And we see that exactly that happenned in the course of history. His academic treatise was misused by muslims and non muslims to create division / falsehood / lies and propaganda.

2- Dua Sanamay Quraysh, IF it is authentic is referring to tahrif in the meaning of the quran. If you refer to sayyid al Khoi and other eminent shia scholars on this subject, you will see that tahrif of the meaning is the first level of tahrif, and IT OCCURRED according to all muslims. Sayyid AlKhoi says:

‘The word Tahrif carries a number of meanings…First the word Tahrif has the sense of ‘’transferring a word form its original sense to another, and transforming its meaning into another’’. Such as the meaning derived from the following verse, ‘Of those who are Jews there are those who alter (yuharrifuna) words from their places [in the scripture]…’ 4.46.’
 

This meaning of "tahrif", i.e., changing of meaning or changing the context, as it appears in the Quran, has not only been applied in the Muslim community to the verses of the Quran but also to the ahadith of the Holy Prophet, even by rulers who have been prepared to use Islam to their own personal advantage. It is this "tahrif", with this meaning, that the Imams of Ahlul-Bayt have constantly sought to oppose. As one example, Imam al-Baqir (AS) complained about the situation of the Muslims and their corrupt rulers, and said:

"One of the manifestations of their rejecting the Book (of Allah behind their backs) (see Quran 2:101) is that they have fixed its words. but they have altered the limits (of its command) (harrafu hududah). They have (correctly) narrated it, but they do not observe (what) it (says). Ignorant people delight in their preservation of its narration, but the knowledgeable people deplore their ignoring to
observe (what) it (says)."

Shi'i references:
- al-Kafi, v8, p53
- al-Kafi, v5, p274 and v14, p214

This use of "Tahrif" is taken as a definition for the word wherever it appears in the ahadith of the Imams, similar to what Quran (4:46) has used.

It is necessary to emphasize here that all grand scholars of the Imami Shia are in agreement that the Quran which is at present among the Muslims is the very same Quran that was sent down to the Holy Prophet, and that it has not been altered. Nothing has been added to it, and nothing is missing from it. The Quran which was compiled by Imam Ali (excluding the commentaries) and the Quran 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 Quran (collected by the companions) is not in the order that was revealed.
 

3- As for Shaheed Ayatollah Murtada Muttahari r.a dont try to deviate and misguide people by showing one side of the story. Shaheed Muttahari r.a himself wrote the following with regards to this particular matter about him in his book "Ashura: Misrepresentations and Distortions" (translated from persian by Ali Quli Qara'i)

"some of the books that he wrote were not worthy of his station [3] -and for this reason he earned the reproach of his contemporary scholars

[3] This is a reference to his controversial book Fasl al-Khitab in which he, contrary to the general belief of Shi'i Imami scholars through the course of history, raised doubts concerning the occurrence of tahrif (mainly the occurrence of deletions) in the Qur'an

3- Similarly, Imam Khumayni [ra] while speaking about the book, Fasl Al Khitab, said that it degraded and disgraced the position of this alim.

Speaking of Imam Khumayni r.a, he clearly wrote and clarified his position on Quran, in his book Tahzeeb al Usul Vol 2, Page 165:

‘THE NARRATIONS THAT ARE RELIED UPON ARE EITHER WEAK AND THEREFORE DO NOT COUNT AS PROOF....AND TAHRIF HAS OCCURRED BUT IN THE MEANING NOT IN THE WORDS OF THE QURAN’

Notice ‘tahrif occurred but in the meaning..’ so not in the way you are implying.
 

4- What is usually not mentioned when the Salafi / Wahabi / Extremist Sunnis use this accusation to accuse the shia, is that half of the book of Al Nuri al Tabrasi dealt with sunni narrations about tahrif of Quran!!! The author used ahadith that he compiled from both Sunnis and Shia.

We are sure we don’t need to tell anyone the position of Imam Khumayni in the eyes of the shia.

5- The great scholar Shaheed Ayatollah Sayyid al Khoei [ra] in his book Al Bayan examines and critically analysed the narrations that say/imply tahrif and showed that they were either false or misiniterpreted.

Sayyid Khoei's view [ra] is best described in his own words:

'The accepted view is that NO ALTERATION has occurred in the Quran and that the TEXT IN OUR HANDS is the WHOLE Quran that was revealed to the great Prophet [pbuhhf].'

Shia Reference: Al Bayan fi Tafsir al Quran pg 137 in the chapter ‘PROTECTION OF THE QURAN FROM ALTERATION’.

This also answers false allegations against Allamah Majlisi r.a that he beleived in Tahreef (see more below).

ACCUSATION NO.2:

Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (d. 1111 AH), writes in Mir'aat Al-Uqul, Vol. 12, P. 525, in his interpretation of the Hadith in Al-Kafi: “The Quraan which Gabriel came with to Muhammad (saws) contains 17000 verses.”

He further wrote after this:

“Authenticated, and in some copies narrated through Hashim bin Salem instead of Haroon bin Salem, so the narration is AUTHENTIC. It is obvious that this narration and lots of (other) authentic narrations are expressive concerning the loss of Quraan and its manipulation, and for me the narrations in this regard are mutawatirra in their meaning (i.e. delivered by many people), and the rejection of all of them requires directly not to rely on (any) narrations at all. Even more it is my opinion that the narrations in this regard are not inferior to the narrations about the Imaamah. So how do they prove it (the Imaamah) relied on narrations?”

So basically Baqir Majlissi is saying that rejecting all these narrations is like rejecting the concept of Imaamat since both - the narrations about the alleged manipulation of the Quraan as well as the narrations about the Imaamat have the same level of authenticity.

So the conclusion is: Not only did he believe in the manipulation of the Quraan, but he was also a furious defender of this Kuffr.

Answer:

Briefly, manipulation as I mentioned previously has occurred in the meaning. It has also occurred with the explanation. We and yourselves have ahadith along the lines of:

'I received the Quran and also twice like it...’

Our ulema have explaned that this is hadith Qudsi but also tafsir. When we go back to certain verses we see that the sahaba used to recite the explanation with it [eg, the verse of Muta..]. This is what the mushaf of Imam Ali [as] contained and it is what was rejected by the political leadership. Imam Al Majlisi r.a was dealing with people that claimed that all of these are weak, and that’s not true as there are sahih narrations and since they are mutawatir they should belive in them, and if we don’t then we cant prove Imamah….Why? Because the narrations in that regard are also mutawatir…

As for Mirat al Uqool has many weak traditions as graded by Allamah Majlisi himself and its a treatise of traditions of al-Kafi in the first place. Bihar al Anwaar is a collection of Ahadith which are unclassified / ungraded and are left for scholars of various branches of hadith science and fiqh to study and authenticate using various resources and faculties like ilm al rajaal etc..These books contain traditions narrated not only by shi'ites but also from sunni isnaad / chains of narrations. Bihar al Anwaar is an encyclopaedia of hadith of all sorts to give the scholars of the ummah the chance to look at the raw material that has been transmitted from various sources [of variying quality / origin] and then to grade them according to their competence and skills in hadith sciences.

You quoted or perhaps copy/pasted the out of context text from Mir'at al Uqool and alleged it as Allamah Majlisi r.a's beleif in corruption of Quran. May Allah forgive you (and those who emotionally copy/paste lies) for this sin because Allamah Majlisi r.a himself says in Bihaar al Anwaar after taking note of all such narrations that:

‘That which is between the two covers is the word of Allah WITHOUT any addition and eliminaton’

Shia Reference: Bihaar al Anwar, vol 92 page 75

Thankfully, to avoid any mischief and mud slinging from anti shia extremists, Allamah Baqir Majlisi r.a himself further clarified this PERSONAL beleif in infallibility of Quran at another place within the very same "Bihar al Anwar" after mentioning traditions which have been narrated from various people with regards to manipulations in Quran:

As can be also read online in Bihaar al Anwaar online:

http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/behar/behar89/108.htm

Page 75:

فإن قال قائل كيف يصحّ القول بأن الّذي بين الدفتين هو كلام الله تعالى على الحقيقة من غير زيادة ولا نقصان وأنتم تروون عن الأئمة ^ أنّهم قرأوا ( كنتم خير أئمة أخرجت للناس ) وكذلك ( جعلناكم أئمة وسطا ... ) وهذا بخلاف ما في المصحف الذي في أيدي الناس ؟ قيل له : قد مضى الجواب عن هذا وهو أنّ الأخبار التي جاءت بتلك أخبار آحاد لا يقطع على الله تعالى بصحتها فلذلك وقفنا فيها ولم نعدل عمّا في المصحف الظاهر على ما أمرنا به حسب ما بيّناه مع أنّه لا ينكر أن تأتي القراءة على وجهين منزلين أحدهما ما تضمنه المصحف والثاني ماجاء به الخبر كما يعترف مخالفونا به من نزول القرآن على وجوه شتى


He is asked about the narrations of tahreef in quran, and he answers:

‘We have already responded to this, and that the narrations…are AHAD (Singular) and NOT SAHIH..’

Shia Reference: Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (d. 1111 AH), Bihar al-'Anwar, vol. 89 p. 75.

Therefore it is crystal clear from the above that Imam Al Majlisi r.a did NOT believe in tahrif of the quran.

ACCUSATION NO.3:

Al-Fayd Al-Kashani, the “great” Shiite Mufassir, author of the Tafsir Al-Safi.

After quoting a lot of narrations to “prove” the manipulation of the Quraan, which he collected from the most “authentic” Shiite sources, he comes to the following conclusion:

“I say: The benefit from these and other narrations from the chain of Ahl ul Bait is that the Quraan which we have (at present) is NOT EXACTLY LIKE WHAT HAS BEEN REVEALED TO MUHAMMAD (SAWS), BUT RATHER THERE IS WHICH IS IN CONTRARY TO WHAT ALLAH HAS REVEALED, AND FROM IT THERE IS WHAT HAS BEEN CHANGED AND MANIPULATED (“MUGHAYAR MUHARRAF”) AND THAT LOTS OF THINGS HAVE BEEN TAKEN OUT LIKE THE NAME OF ALI IN LOTS OF INSTANCES; AND LIKE THE EXPRESSION <<AAL MUHAMMAD>> MANY TIMES; AND FROM IT ARE THE NAMES OF THE MUNAFIQEEN IN ITS PLACES; AND OTHER THINGS; AND THAT IT IS ALSO NOT IN THE ORDER WHICH PLEASES ALLAH AND THE PROPHET
 

Reply: Whover says that Al Faydh Al Kashani [ra] belived in tahrif of the quran is either grossly mistaken or a LIAR. What is quoted above are his comments on ahadith and what he belives they point to. No where does he say that these ahadith are true. It is a simple analysis of the riwayat on this subject.

His belief in the authentiity of the Quran is echoed numerous times in his works. Take for the example the same tafsir you qouted. After quoting ahadith which imply tahrif he quotes verses from the Quran and then says at the end:

‘…whatever implies tahrif took place is in contradiction with the book of Allah and a lie, and it is obligatory on us to refute them and regard them as falsehood or reinterpret them’

Shia Reference: Tafsir Al safi vol 1 page 33-34

ACCUSATION NO.4:

You leave me no choice but to quote Faydh al Kashani again. On Page 421 of his Tafsir, he writes:

أما ظهورك على تناكر قوله تعالى وان خفتم ألا تقسطوا في اليتامى فانكحوا ما طاب لكم من النساء فليس يشبه القسط في اليتامى نكاح النساء ولا كل النساء اليتامى فهو مما قدمت ذكره من اسقاط المنافقين من القرآن وبين القول في اليتامى وبين نكاح النساء من الخطاب والقصص أكثر من ثلث القرآن وهذا وما أشبهه مما ظهرت حوادث المنافقين فيه لأهل النظر والتأمل ووجد المعطلون وأهل الملل المخالفة للإسلام مساغا إلى القدح في القرآن ولو شرحت لك كل ما أسقط وحرف وبدل لما يجري هذا المجرى لطال وظهر ما تحظر التقية اظهاره من مناقب الأولياء ومثالب الأعداء مثنى وثلاث ورباع ثنتين ثنتين وثلاث ثلاث واربع اربع وتخيير في العدد لكل أحد إلى أربع .

Do you want me to translate how he accuses the Book of Allah (swt) of being contradictory and how a third of the real Quraan was deleted? Or shall I translate that he openly says that if he continued talking on this matter it would reveal much more of what the Taqiyyah is hiding?

Now could you please tell me who is grossly mistaken or a liar?

As for your quote from Faydh al Kashani beleiving in infallibility and no alterations in quran from the above Tafseer, I didn't find such a quote. But alhamdulilah, the Tafsir is online:

http://www.alquran-network.net/tafsirbook/...-01/al-safi-01/

Reply: He’ accuses does he?

As you seem to be in a translating mood then could you please tell me what this, which is just before what you quoted means:

وفي الإحتجاج

[hint: he is quoting somewhere! i.e the book al ihtijaj!]

And on page 51 he shows his position on ahadith like that [btw this one is mursal anyway] when he says:

ويرد على هذا كله إشكال وهو أنه على هذا التقدير لم يبق لنا اعتماد على شيء من القرآن إذ على هذا يحتمل كل آية منه أن يكون محرفا ومغيرا ويكون على خلاف ما أنزل الله فلم يبق لنا في القرآن حجة أصلا فتنتفي فائدته وفائدة الأمر باتباعه والوصية بالتمسك به إلى غير ذلك ، وأيضا قال الله عز وجل : وإنه لكتاب عزيز لا يأتيه الباطل من بين يديه ولا من خلفه . وقال : إنا نحن نزلنا الذكر وإنا له لحافظون فكيف يتطرق إليه التحريف والتغيير ، وأيضا قد استفاض عن النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم والأئمة عليهم السلام حديث عرض الخبر المروي على كتاب الله ليعلم صحته بموافقته له وفساده بمخالفته فإذا كان القرآن الذي بأيدينا محرفا فما فائدة العرض مع أن خبر التحريف مخالف لكتاب الله مكذب له فيجب رده والحكم بفساده أو تأويله

^Care to translate….!!!


Then he follows that by saying that for arguments sake, IF the ahadith saying the quran was changed are true, then it could be said that this change was in a way that did not alter the meaning, like removal of names. But his position on them is clear throughout the book.

Alhamdulilah, Heres the link and its on the bottom of page 51.

http://www.alquran-network.net/tafsirbook/...fi-01/03.html#8

أن خبر التحريف مخالف لكتاب الله مكذب له فيجب رده والحكم بفساده أو تأويله
 

He says this a few times. And could you kindly refer to his tafsir of the Quranic verse:

‘And surely We have revealed the Reminder and surely We will protect it’

where he echoes the same view.

ACCUSATION NO.5

Anyway, let's have a closer look at the alleged list of Shiite scholars who rejected the manipulation:

Shaykh al-Mufid (d. 413 AH), Awa'ilu l-Maqalat, pp. 55-6;

He wrote in Awa'el ul Maqalat:

"The Imaamiyyah is in consent that....the leaders of misguidance contradicted in much of the compilation of Quraan and changed in it from the revelation and Sunnah of the Prophet (saws)" (48-49)

Furthermore he wrote:

"There are plenty of narrations by the Aimmah of guidance of Aal Muhammad about the changing of the Quraan and what the oppressors did with it of deletion." (P. 81)

Reply: These are very dishonest quotes.

In the first one Shaykh Mufid is saying that they changed the reasons for revelation [mawjib altanzil] and the sunnah of the prophet, not that they made these changes in the Quran.

The second quote is shocking. Why don’t you go and get yourself Awail al Maqalat and go to page 81 and read what he said after that quote. You will find that he refutes it!!! If you want me to translate the refutation then say so but I will give you his ending remark:

He talks about interpreting tawil of quran as quran and shows that this is what the riwayat mean, and also mentions Quranic verses that prove this, and then says ‘and this is more likely to me that one who says that there are verses missing from the quran without ta’wil, and to this opinion do I turn….’
 

ACCUSATION NO.6:

Ali bin Ibrahim Al-Qummi classified the different kinds of verses in the introduction of his famous tafsir...

Among his classification of verses we read the following:

“As for what is IN CONTRADICTION to what has been revealed by Allah (swt), it is

“You are the best of peoples (UMMAH) ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'ruf and forbid Al-Munkar, and you believe in Allah.”

So Abu Abdallah said to the recitator of this verse: “The “best peoples” kill Ameer ul Mu’mineen and Hassan und Hussain bin Ali ?””

So it was said to him: “Then how was it revealed, O Son of the Messenger of Allah?”

He said: “It was revealed: “You are the best AIMMAH ever raised up for mankind” Don’t you see Allah’s praise for them at the end of the verse? “you enjoin Al-Ma'ruf and forbid Al-Munkar, and you believe in Allah.””

And in analogy is the vese read to Ali Abu Abdallah : “And those who say: "Our Lord! Bestow on us from our wives and our offspring who will be the comfort of our eyes, and make us leaders FOR the Muttaqun" (25:74)”

So Abu Abdallah said: “They asked Allah to make them for the Muttaqeen leaders. So it was said to him: “O Son of the Messenger of Allah, how was it revealed?”

He said: “In fact, it was revealed: ““And those who say: "Our Lord! Bestow on us from our wives and our offspring who will be the comfort of our eyes, and make FOR us leaders FROM the Muttaqun””…and many more examples.

Then this “great” Shiite scholar continues by saying:

“As for what HAS BEEN MANIPULATED (“MUHARRAF”!!) it is His saying:

"But Allah beareth witness that what He hath sent unto thee CONCERNING ALI He hath sent from His (own) knowledge, and the angels bear witness”

and His saying:

“O Apostle! proclaim the (Message) which hath been sent to thee from thy Lord ABOUT ALI. If thou didst not, thou wouldst not have fulfilled and proclaimed His Mission.”

And His saying: “Those who reject Faith and OPPRESS THE RIGHT OF AAL MUAHMMAD, Allah will not forgive them nor guide them to any way.”

And His saying: “And soon will the OPPRESSORS OF the RIGHT OF AAL MUHAMMD know what vicissitudes their affairs will take!”

and His saying: “If thou couldst but see how the OPPRESSORS OF THE RIGHT OF AAL MUHAMMAD (do fare) in the flood of confusion at death.”

For those among you who prefer reading it with their own eyes from well-known Shiite sites:

http://www.al-shia.com/html/ara/books/tafs...ommi-j1/01.html

Reply: Tafsir Al Qummi is attributed to Sheikh Ali Ibn Ibraheem al Qummi but there is doubt that it is [all] his.

Ayatollah al Udhama, Sheikh Ja3far Al Subhani (h.a) writes in his book Kulliyat fi 3ilm Al rijal page 317:

‘Many of the Ulema that have scrutinised the available version, comparing it to what has been narrated in various books from this tafsir have found that they are different. Because of this we can no longer rely on the sanad or the substance [matn]….In summary it is therefore not right nor just than anyone attributes belief in tahrif to Ali Ibn Ibraheem Al Qummi based on what is found in his tafsir. And whoever wants to examine the issue of his tafsir then he should go to, ‘Siyanat Al Quran min Al Tahrif…..’

He mentions many books that have examined this in detail which I havnt included. If you want the refrences then just tell me.

 

REFUTING ATTACKS ON CERTAIN SHI'ITE NARRATIONS

Narration No. 1

On authority of Ja’far Ibn Muhammad that he said: the Qur’an was compiled by none but the Imam and the Qur’an whom (Archangel) Gabriel revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him) was of 17000 verses.

Shia Reference: "Al-Kafi", Chapter 471, Number 28 in Volume 4, page 446.

Reply: This tradition in Usul al Kafi which has been widely misinterpreted, states that what has been revealed to Prophet was as much as 17000 verses.

Although this tradition is not rated authentic, there are two explanations for that. The first possibility mentioned by our scholars is that, the verses of Quran were originally shorter, and when the companions compiled the Quran, they appended short verses and thereby the number of verses reduced without any change to content of Quran.

The second possibility is that which was given by Shaikh Saduq (RA) who is the number one Shi'a scholar in the field of Hadith:


"We say that so much of revelation has come down which is not embodied in the present Quran that if it were to be collected, its extent would undoubtedly be 17000 verses ... Although all of them were revelation but they (the extra ones) are NOT a part of Quran. If they would be a part of Quran, it would surely have been included in the Quran we have."

Shi'i reference: Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq, English version, pp 78-79.


The transcript of the Quran that Imam Ali wrote contained commentary and hermeneutic interpretation (Tafsir and Ta'wil) from the Holy Prophet some of which had been sent down as revelation but NOT as a part of the text of Quran. A small amount of such texts can be found in some traditions in Usul al-Kafi and else. These pieces of information were Divine commentary of the text of Quran which was revealed along with Quranic verses but were NOT parts of Quran. Thus the commentary verses and Quranic verses could sum up to 17000 verses. As Sunnis know, Hadith Qudsi is also revelation, but they are not a part of Quran. In fact Quran testifies that anything that Prophet said was revelation. Allah Almighty said in Quran about Prophet Muhammad that:


"Nor does he (Muhammad) speak out of his desire. It is no less than a revelation that is revealed." (Quran 53:3-4).


Thus all the speeches of Prophet were revelation, and surely the speeches of Prophet was not limitted to Quran. It includes interpretation of Quran (part of which were direct revelation) as well as his Sunnah (part of which were indirect revelation).

Narration No.2:

On authority of Imam Muhammad Al-Baqir that he said: none claims that he has compiled the whole Qur’an as revealed but a liar. None has compiled and memorized it as revealed but Ali Ibn Abi Talib and the Imams after him

Shia Reference: Al Kafi by Al Kulaini, Vol.1, Book of "Virtues of the Qur'an".

Reply:  A Wahhabi alleged that it is reported in al-Kafi (one of the Shi'ite Hadith collection) that the Shia Imam said:

"No one compiled the Quran completely except the Imams".

There is no such a tradition in Usul Kafi. I question the validity of the booklets that have misquoted the traditions. What is written in Usul Kafi in a tradition is as follows:

I heard Abu Ja'far (AS) saying: "No one (among ordinary people) claimed that he gathered the Quran completely as it was revealed except a liar; (since) no one has gathered it and memorized it completely as revealed by Allah, the Most High, except Ali Ibn Abi Talib (AS) and the Imams after him (AS)".

Shia Reference: Usul al-Kafi, v1, p228, Hadith #1.

The above tradition does not say Quran is incomplete. Rather it states it is not completely in the arrangement as it was sent down. The above tradition is not something new. As a matter of fact, the Quran that we use which was compiled by the companions is not in the sequence that has been revealed. In fact, the Sunni scholars confirm that the first Chapter of Quran which was sent down to the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was Chapter al-Iqra' (al-Alaq, Ch. 96).


Sunni References:
- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi, v1, p259
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p202
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p417
- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani, v7, p454


As you know the Chapter al-Alaq is not at the beginning of the present Quran. Also Muslims agree that the verse (Quran 5:3) was among one of the last revealed verses of Quran (but not the very last one), yet it is not toward the end of the present Quran. This proves that although the Quran that we have available is complete, it is not in the order that has been revealed.
 

We should point out that Imam Ali was not the only one who had a Quran with different arrangements. According to the authentic Sunni reports, many companions had different arrangement (sequence) of Quran, one of them was Abdullah Ibn Masud:


Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.518
Narrated Shaqiq:

Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza'ir which the Prophet used to recite in pairs in each Rak'a." Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those Suras). He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning of al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas'ud, and end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). and "About what they question one another?" (78.1)

Thus this is nothing exclusive to Imam Ali. I should mention that the prophet clearly indicated (by Sunni sources) that Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of Quran:
 

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.521
Narrated Masriq:

'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take (learn) the Quran from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin Ka'b.' "

This man (Abdullah Ibn Masud) not only had a different Quran but also (based on Sunni sources) he had a different sequence of chapters and different set of aayaat. He alleged that the present Quran has some extra words, and he swears in the name of Allah for his claim! (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, 6.468, 5.105, 5.85). He also falsely alleged that the last two chapters of Quran are not Quranic chapters and they are only some prayers (Du'aa). (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, 6.501)

According to the Shia, these allegations by the companions reported in Sahih al-Bukhari concerning Quran having extra words are FALSE. No single verse of Quran is extra.

Also it seems that Aisha has a different opinion as to which chapter was revealed first:


Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.515
Narrated Yusuf bin Mahk:

While I was with Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Quran," She said, "Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Quran according to it, for people recite it with its Surahs not in proper order." 'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be informed) that the first thing that was revealed there of was a Sura from al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire.

Narration No.3:

Abu Jafar said: "No one can claim that he completely has the Quran with its appearance (Dhahir) and its meaning (Batin), except the executors (Awsiyaa)."

Shia Reference: Usul al-Kafi, Tradition #608

Reply: This is another tradition in Usul Kafi which is misinterpreted. Again this tradition is referring to the fact that the commentary of Quran is missing. Although we have the appearance of Quran, its meaning (i.e.,divine commentary) is not with it. The traditions refers to the Quran which was compiled by Imam Ali (AS) which included the commentary.

It is necessary to emphasize here that all grand scholars of the Imami Shia are in agreement that the Quran which is at present among the Muslims is the very same Quran that was sent down to the Holy Prophet, and that it has not been altered. Nothing has been added to it, and nothing is missing from it. The Quran which was compiled by Imam Ali (excluding the commentaries) and the Quran that is in the hand of people today, are identical in terms of words and sentences. No word, verse, chapter is missing.

A Wahhabi mentioned that al-Kafi is an authentic book of Hadith for the Shia, and as such Shia believe that Quran is not complete.

The above conclusion is based on two wrong hypotesis. First what was mentioned in the book of al-Kafi does not necessarily indicate that Quran is incomplete (see the above explanation). Second, we do not consider al-Kafi to be all-authentic book of tradition, nor his auther ever mentioned such a thing.

It is true that al-Kafi is among the most important Shia collections of traditions. The traditions of al-Kafi cover all the branches of faith and ethics, and all the fundamental of fiqh (jurisprudence). It includes more traditions than all 6 Sunni collections together (provided that if we remove the repetitions). For instance, al-Kafi has 16121 traditions, while Sahih al-Bukhari which has many repetition in itself has only 7275 traditions. If we remove the repetitions, al-Kafi has 15176 traditions while Sahih al-Bukhari will end up with 4000 traditions. The traditions mentioned here include both Usul al-Kafi and Furu' al-Kafi.

The author of al-Kafi, Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Yaqub al-Kulain al-Razi (d. 329/941), may Allah have mercy upon his soul, is considered to be highly honest and highly reliable. However, we should emphasize that neither the traditions are equal in value and significance, nor are the supportive evidence for the narrations. The authorities of the chain of narrations are not also equal in terms of reliability and credibility, and one can in NO
way regard them as equally dependable.

A glance at the book entitled "Mir'atul Uqul" (reflection of the minds) will reveal this very point to the researcher in more detail. "Mir'atul Uqul" is an explanatory book to al-Kafi written by another great Shia scholar of Hadith, Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d. 1111/1700) who is among the most loyal and faithful to the book of al-Kafi. Majlisi has rated some of the traditions of al-Kafi as WEAK. However, being weak, does not mean the tradition is forged. If one of the chain of the authorities of a tradition is missing, then the tradition is weak in Isnad without regard to its content.

In fact, there are a number of traditions in al-Kafi which have one or more elements from the chain of narrators are missing. As such, all of them are regarded weak in Isnad. It might also be that a tradition is specific for a person who reported it from Imam, and may not have meant for the whole people. This very point is mentioned in Usul al-Kafi itself:

Ibn Abi Ya'fur said, I inquired of Abu Abdillah (AS) about the different traditions related by those whom we trust and also by those whom we don't." Hearing this, the Imam (AS) replied: "Whenever you receive a tradition which is borne out by any verse from the book of Allah or by a (established) saying of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), then accept it. Otherwise, the tradition is meant only for the one who has brought it to you."

Shia Reference: Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English version, Tradition #202


Shaikh al-Kulaini (RA), the author of al-Kafi, in the introduction of his book, mentioned the following:

Brother, may Allah lead you to the right path. You ought to know that it is not for anyone to distinguish the truth in the conflicting narrations attributed to the Ulama (i.e., Imams), peace be upon them, except through the standards which were declared by al-Alim (i.e., the Imam), peace be upon him:

"Test the (conflicting) traditions by the Book of Allah, and that which agrees with it take it, and that which disagrees with it reject it..."

Shia Reference: Usul al-Kafi, Arabic version, Introduction by al-Kulaini, v1


Is there any explanation better than that of the author? He mentioned that there are some conflicting narrations in his book, al-Kafi. He also mentioned that we should follow those Hadiths that are in agreement with the Book of Allah, and leave that which is in clear disagreement with Quran. To prove this point, al-Kulaini (RA) quoted a part of the Hadith of Ahlul-Bayt (AS) that, in fact, confirms it as a criterion for the all the followers of
Ahlul-Bayt (AS).

After all, do the opponents of Shi'a expect us to leave what the author of al-Kafi confirmed in his own book, and to believe their false accusation that al-Kafi is all-authentic Hadith collection for the Shi'a?

Also a Wahhabi mentioned that in the introduction to the al-Kafi, it is written that the al-Mahdi has examined the book and said that it is good for his followers.

There is no such a thing in the introduction written by al-Kulain himself (who is the author of al-Kafi). This is what another person has mentioned in his own introduction to introduce al-Kafi and its author, which is placed before the introduction of the author. Also you did not correctly mentioned what is attributed to Imam Mahdi (AS). If such report is ever true, Imam Mahdi (AS) said:

"al-Kafi is sufficient of our Shia (followers)."

There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, as I mentioned, al-Kafi's traditions cover all the branches of faith and ethics, and all the fundamentals of fiqh. Imam Mahdi (AS) did NOT say whatever written in it is correct. Rather he [reportedly] said, it is sufficient, and includes all what his followers need in terms of the traditions. Again, such tradition is not mentioned by al-Kulain himself.

al-Kafi means something that is sufficient. It does not mean all its content are perfectly correct, since the narrators were not perfect. Actually the reason that the author named his book al-Kafi was explained in the introduction of the book written by himself. The scholars of his time asked him to compile a book of traditions which covers all necessary branches of religion of Islam. He wrote in his introduction that:

... and you complained that there is no book that could cover all the branches of the knowledge of religion (Ilm al-Din) to save the seeker of truth from referring to many books and which could not suffice as a guide and source of spiritual light in the matters of theology and the traditions of rightly guided Imams, peace be upon them. You expressed the urgent need of such a book and I hope that the present book would serve this purpose.

Shia Reference: Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English version, Introduction by al-Kulaini, part 1, pp 17-18

al-Kulaini (RA) is not one of the twelve Imams of the Shi'ites. He was only a Hadith recorder who reported what was conveyed to him through one or more sources. He never said that he heard from Imam al-Sadiq (AS), and he stated only a Hadith that came to him through some reporters. Let it be stated that the tradition of al-Kafi or any other Shia/Sunni book is NOT acceptable to the Imami Shi'ites if it wants to ever imply the incompleteness of the Quran. These few traditions are rated weak. Even if we suppose that they are true, then the extra verses would mean the divine commentary of Quran which were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad along with Quran but not as a part of Quran as Shaykh Saduq and other scholars specified.

So, if one brings a weak tradition from Usul al-Kafi and then misinterpret the Hadith, it can not represent a belief of the Shia. However, when Sunnis claim that Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are all-authentic, they will have a big problem when they reach to those traditions in these books which allegedly imply the incompleteness of Quran. Do you see the difference, my friend?

In book, entitled "Science of Hadith" written by Zainul-Abideen Qurbani, discusses in great detail the traditions in which may imply the incompleteness of the Quran. Here is one passage from it:

More than 95% of Shia scholars believe that there has been absolutely no tampering of the Quran and that the Quran we hold in our hands today is exactly the same Quran that was revealed to Muhammad (saw), without a single word missing or being extra. To quote the words of Shia scholars in this regard would require a whole separate treatise.

But we briefly name just a few of them:

Beginning with Shaikh Suduq, whose words we already quoted, to Shaikh Mofid, Sayyed Murtada, Shaikh Tusi,.Allamah Hilli, Muqaddas Aridibili, Khashif al-ghitaa, Shaikh Bahai, Fayz Kashani, Shaikh Hurr Ameli, Mohaqiq Kurki, Sayyed Mehdi Bahr ul-Uloom, Sayyed Muhammad Mujahid Tabataba'i, Shaikh Muhammad Husain Ashtiyani, Shaikh Abdullah Mamqani, Shaikh Javad Balaghi, Sayyed Hibbat al-Din Shahristani, Sharif Radi, Ibn Idris, Sayyed Mohsin Amin Ameli, Sayyed Abdul-Husain Sharif al-Din, Sayyed Hadi Milani, Sayyed Muhammad Husain Allamah Tabataba'i, Sayyed Abul-Ghasim Khoei, Sayyed Muhammad Rada Golbayegani, Sayyed Shahab al-Din Mar'ashi Najafi, Ruhullah Khomeini, etc.

The author then goes on to quote several pages of statements by top Shia scholars about the completeness and perfect authenticity of the Holy Quran.

It is hoped that what was offered on this subject is sufficient for those who try to find the truth, that the Shia are the true believers in Quran. It is improper for those who seek the truth to accuse others of something which they are entirely innocent of.

Narration No.4:

Abu Baseer reported that he said to Imam Ja'far, "O Abu Abdullah(Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq) What is Mushaf Fatimah" He replied "It is a Qur'an containing three times what is found in your copy of the Qur'an; yet by Allah, it does not contain even a single letter from your Qur'an. ( AlKafi vol.1 p.457 )

Reply: Some anti-Shi'i booklets published by Wahhabi/Salafi groups allege that based on Usul Kafi, Shia believe there is a Quran called "Quran of Fatimah"! This is a malicious accusation. There is no tradition in Usul Kafi saying "Quran of Fatimah".  There are however, very few traditions in one chapter of Usul Kafi which assert that Fatimah (AS) wrote a book (mushaf). The tradition states "The book of Fatimah". Surely Quran is a book (mushaf), but any book is NOT Quran. This allegation is as silly as saying "Quran of al-Bukhari"
instead of "book of al-Bukhari"!

Also those few traditions in al-Kafi clearly state that there is NO single verse of Quran in the Book of Fatimah. This shows that the book of Fatimah is TOTALLY different than Quran. Of course, it was three time bigger than
Quran in length.

In one tradition it said that Fatimah (AS), after the Prophet (PBUH&HF) passed away, used to write what she was told that would happen to her descendants and stories about other rulers to come (up to the day of
resurrection). Fatimah (AS) recorded (or asked Imam Ali to record) those information, which was kept in her family of Imams, and was called  "The Book (Mushaf) of Fatimah". A tradition which follows this one clearly
states that what is referred to by "The Book of Fatimah" is not a part of Quran and has NOTHING to do with Allah's commandments/halals/harams. It does NOT have anything to do with Shari'ah (divine law) and the religious practices. Let me give you some of those traditions:


Abu Abdillah (AS) said: "... We have with us the Book of Fatimah, but I do not claim that anything of the Quran is in it."

Shia Reference: Usul al-Kafi, Tradition #637

Abu Abdillah (AS) also said about the book of Fatimah: "There is nothing of what is permitted and what is forbidden (al-Halal and al-Haram) in this; but in it is the knowledge of what will happen."

Shia Reference: Usul Kafi, Tradition #636
 

Abdul Malik Ibn Ayan said to Abu Abdillah (AS): "The Zaydiyyah and the Mu'tazilah have gathered around Muhammad Ibn Abdillah (Ibn al-Hasan, the second). Will have they any rule?" He (AS) said: "By Allah there are two books in my possession in which every prophet and every ruler who rules on this earth (from the beginning of the earth till the day of Judgment) has been named. No, by Allah, Muhammad Ibn Abdillah is not one of them."

Shia Reference: Usul Kafi, Tradition #641


"Mushaf" refers to a collection of "Sahifa" which is singular for "page". The literal meaning of Mushaf is "The manuscript bound between two boards".

In those days they used to write on leather and other materials. They either rolled the writings -- what is known as scroll in English. Or they kept the separable sheets and bound them together, in what could be called
as "Mushaf", a book in today's terms. The equivalent to the word book "Kitab" used to (and still is) refer to either a letter (e.g. of correspondence) or to an document that was written down or recorded. The Arabic word for wrote "Kataba" is a derivative of the same word.

Although the Quran is commonly called a "Mushaf" today, perhaps referring to its "collection" after it was dispersed. Quran is a Mushaf (book), but any Mushaf (book) is not necessarily the Quran!  There is no Quran of
Fatimah! As the above and many other traditions suggest, The book of Fatimah has absolutely no connection with Quran. This concept is commonly pulled out of context and published by anti-Shi'i groups due to their
hatred toward the Followers of the Members of the House of Prophet (PBUH&HF). I have seen it mentioned in a book printed by the government of Saudi Arabia.

What is also *very* important to recognize and understand is that belief in Mushaf Fatimah is NOT a requirement of BELIEF to the Shia. It is just few traditions which report such a thing. It is nothing crucial for us, nor any one (except Imam Mahdi) has access to it.

Exploitation of Traditions
 

As mentioned above, the enemies of Islam had succeeded in circulating such anti-Qur'an traditions in the Muslim world, attributing them to famous personalities of Islam, the companions of the Prophet as well as his Ahlul bayt; and gradually the Muslims unwittingly accepted and recorded these weak, rather forged, ahadith in their collections of ahadith. In spite of that, the Muslim 'ulama', Shi'a and Sunni alike, did not believe that there was any alteration in, addition to, or omission from the Qur'an. No sensible 'alim of either sect accused the other sect that it believed in tahrif of the Qur'an.

Of course there have appeared from time to time some 'ulama' on both sides, who indulged in mudslinging against the opposite sect, not realizing that presence of a hadith in a book does not necessarily mean that the people of that group really believed in it. But such traditions remained more or less buried in the books and usually they were not propagated for the simple reason that nobody based his belief on them.

Things abruptly changed in February 1979, when the Iranian nation, under the unparalleled guidance of the late Ayatullah al-'uzma al-Khomeini succeeded in establishing the first truly Islamic government on the earth, centuries after the days of the Imams (a.s.).

Had the Iranian Revolution resulted in a satellite government following the line of the Western or the Eastern ideology, it would have been gladly accepted-or at least, tolerated-by the self-appointed Guardians of "democracy". But, contrary to the conventional wisdom, it chose to follow the line of Islam. Then it raised the slogan of Islamic Unity. By standing against all un-Islamic "isms", and not bowing before anyone except Allah, Ayatullah al-'uzma al-Khomeini and the Iranian leadership gained unsurpassed popularity in the Muslim ummah throughout the world, from Morocco to the Philippines and from Europe to Americas. Down-trodden masses saw with their own eyes that unarmed bare hands had defeated the mightiest war machine in the Middle East. It gave a new heart to the oppressed people even in non-Muslim countries like South Africa. This rapidly spreading influence of 'Khomeinism' alarmed the U.S.A., the paramount chief' of the Western 'tribes'. They started fighting against Iran, through the proxy war, through news media and in political fora.

On another front, they made their clients in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait believe that the call of Islamic Unity was a mortal danger to their crowns. Ordered by their masters, the Wahhabis started an intensely hateful propaganda against 'Khomeinism', Iran and Shi'ism. Hired pens began churning out books, articles and tracts against the Shi'as, saying that the Shi'a were kafir, they were mushrik, they had their separate Qur'an, and believed this Qur'an of the Muslims to be altered and incomplete. Some of their top employees were Ihsan Ilahi Zaheer and Balighuddeen in Pakistan and Manzoor Ahmad Nu'mani and Abul Hasan 'Ali Nadwi [40] in India. The last-named case is interesting. Long before the Revolution, he posed as a champion of the Islamic Unity. He is the Chairman of the Muslim Personal Law Board in India with a Shi'a 'alim as his vice-chairman. But he is also a recipient of the 'Faisal Award' of the Saudi dynasty. And no sooner was the slogan of "Neither East nor West, Islam is the Best" 'exported' from Iran, than he aligned himself with anti-unity forces. He has written in one of his anti-Shi' a booklets that the Shi'as do not believe in the Qur'an, that is why there was no hafiz-e-Qur'an in the Shi'as. He goes on writing that once when he was invited to Iran, the group was taken to Qum where they visited the house of a Grand Ayatullah. The programme was to start with the recital of the Qur'an, and the son of the Grand Ayatulah, himself an 'alim, stood up, opened the Qur'an and recited some verses from it. Then he says: "In our Sunni faith, even a child memorizes one or two small surahs, but that Shi'a 'alim could not remember even that much. It was because the Shi'as do not believe in the Qur'an."
[Ed: Contrast this with the feats of the six-year old hafiz from Iran] 

Could anyone expect such childish arguments from such a great person? But it seems that the sound coming from his mouth is 'his master's voice' and the Zionism's dagger dipped in Muslims' blood is used for his pen.

A book written by such agents might be written in Urdu, Arabic or any other language; but within a few months it is translated in all major languages of the Muslim world, and made available everywhere as well as freely distributed to the hujjaj.

Ostensibly, the agents of American Islam are doing it to weaken Iran and prevent the Iranian Revolution from influencing the "Muslim Youths" as Abul Hasan Ali Nadvi himself has admitted in the preface of a book. But is this the actual motive of their Masters-the Judeo-Christian enemies of Islam? Obviously, not. The manipulators of the American Islam have exhumed some Shi'a traditions of tahrif buried in the books, with the sole aim that the Shi'a would retaliate by publicising the similar traditions found in the Sunni books, and thus the validity of the Qur'an would be questioned, Muslims' faith in this Last Divine Revelation would be destroyed and as a result. Islam would lose its power.

One of the Shi'a 'alims, Mirza Husayn Nuri (d. 1320 AH) had written a book, Faslu 'l-Khitab, in which he had first collected all the traditions of tahrif from the Sunni sources, then all the traditions from the Shi'a sources, then drawn his own conclusions which were against the accepted Shi'a belief. No sooner was the book printed than its rebuttal was written; and the book, discredited, remained forgotten and almost unknown even in the Shi'a academic circles. Now, the American Islam has reprinted Faslu 'l-Khitab, but after removing the chapter of the Sunni ahadith. They propagate that it is "an authentic Shi'a book" which proves that the Shi'a have no faith in the Qur'an. If these people were really honest, they should have printed the whole book; then their Masters would have been able to "prove" that the entire Muslim ummah did not believe in this Qur'an!!

This demeaning polemics will provide the Christian missionaries with effective arms and ammunitions to shake and rattle the Muslims' faith in the Qur'an. They hope that in this way many Muslims would easily be persuaded to embrace Christianity, and even those who would not convert, would not remain truly Muslim, nor would they follow a Book whose authenticity was doubtful.

Gladstone is reported to have once stood up in the British Parliament with a copy of the Qur'an in his hand; and declared that as long as the Muslims followed this Book, the British could not subjugate them. He advised his people to use every subterfuge to shake the Muslims' belief in the Qur'an.

That strategy of kufr had succeeded in Turkey, Egypt, Tunis, Algeria and many other so-called Muslim countries where a special breed of Muslims has been created which seems to be allergic to Islam and the Qur'an. It was about to succeed in Iran, thanks to the Pahlavi regime. But the plan failed because of the religious leaders under the guidance of the late Ayatullah al-'uzma Khomeini and because of the religiosity of the Iranian nation. Now the enemies of Islam are using this propaganda of tahrif to achieve that goal.

This is what they have planned. But Allah, subhanahu wa ta'ala, says:

They desire to put out the light of Allah with their mouth, and Allah will surely perfect His light, though the unbelievers may be averse. (61:8)
 

Notes:

1- Al-Hussein Ibn 'Ubaidullah Ibn Ibrahim Al-Ghada'iri (died 441 A.H.) was the authority of Imamiyyah Shi'ites in his time and there are many books written by him.

2- Ahmad Ibn Ali Ibn Ahmad Ibn Al-'Abbas An-Najashi Al-Asadi (373-450 A.H.) was an Imamiyyah Shi'ite historian and was known as Ibn-ul-Kufi.

3- Al-Hassan Ibn Yusuf Ibn Ali Ibn Al-Muttahir Al-Hilli, Jamal-ud-Din (648-726 A.H.), was one of the most eminent Shi'ite scholars and his books are uncountable/numerous.

4- Abul-Hassan Ali Ibn Al-Hussein Ibn Musa Ibn Babwai Al-Qummi (died 329 A.H.) was the authority of Imamiyyah Shi'ites in his time and has books in monotheism, Imamship, Tafsir and others.

5- Abul-Qasim Ali Ibn Al-Hussein Ibn Musa Ibn Muhammad Ibn Ibrahim known as Ash-Sharif Al-Murtada (355-436 A.H.), the noble descendant of Imam Musa al Kazim a.s, was one of the most prominent Shi'ite Imams (not to be confused with infallible imams), lived and died in Baghdad and has so many books discussing various topics.

6- Amin-ud-Din Abu Ali Al-Fadl Ibn Al-Hassan Ibn Al-Fadl At-Tabarasi (died 548 A.H) was a Shi'ite critical scholar, exegete and grammarian. He was one of the eminent Imamiyyah Shi'ite scholars and belonged to Tabaristan.

7- Abu Ja'far Muhammad Ibn Al-Hassan Ibn Ali At-Tusi known as Authority of the Sect (Sheikh-ut-Ta'ifa) (385-460 A.H.), one of Shi'ite theologians and exegetes and has many writings.