Man and His Destiny

Man and His Destiny50%

Man and His Destiny Author:
Publisher: AB Cultural Institute
Category: Fundamentals Of Religion

  • Start
  • Previous
  • 21 /
  • Next
  • End
  •  
  • Download HTML
  • Download Word
  • Download PDF
  • visits: 8232 / Download: 4806
Size Size Size
Man and His Destiny

Man and His Destiny

Author:
Publisher: AB Cultural Institute
English

This book is corrected and edited by Al-Hassanain (p) Institue for Islamic Heritage and Thought

Alhassanain (p) Network for Islamic Heritage and Thought

Man and His Destiny

This title deals with the Islamic point of view on fate and destiny. Martyr Ayatullah Mutahhari critically examines historical doctrines on predestination and free will put forth by various schools of thought in Islam including the Mu'tazali and Ash`ari. Based on the verses of the Qur'an and Islamic teachings of the Ahlul Bayt (a), Martyr Mutahhari determines the true and correct position of human free will and predestination from the Islamic point of view.

Author(s): Ayatullah Murtadha Mutahhari

www.alhassanain.org/english

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH

Table of Contents

Short Biography of the Author 4

Prologue 5

Part 1: Fate and Destiny are the Words that Cause Alarm 16

Verses of The Qur’an 17

Qadarite 19

Conflicting Views 19

Part 2: Evil Effects of the Doctrine of Predestination 21

Political Misuse 21

Part 3: Onslaught of Christian Europe on Islam 23

Mental Complex 23

Material Philosophy And Destiny 23

Oneness Of Allah And His Purity 24

Part 4: Literal Meanings of `Qadha’ and `Qadar’ 26

Predestination 27

Part 5: Freedom and Liberty 29

Inevitable And Non-Inevitable 29

Impossible Fantasy 31

What Is Possible 31

Part 6: Human Distinction 35

Part 7: A Glance at the Early Period of Islam 36

Part 8: Qur’an is the Source of Teachings 38

Invariability In Nature 38

Unchangeable Systems 38

Other Theories 39

Part 9: Effect of Spiritual Factors 42

Part 10: When a Divine Decree Comes, Man Feels Helpless 44

Part 11: Divine Destiny and Material Compulsion 46

Difference Between The Two Doctrines 46

Part 12: Special Logic of the Holy Qur’an 48

Part 13: High level of the Logic of Islam 51

Historical Background 53

Notes 55

Part 14: Some Hadiths to the Contrary 57

Part 15: Could Allah’s Knowledge be Wrong? 60

Short Biography of the Author

Martyr Murtadha Mutahhari was born in Fariman (Iran) in February 1919. His father Skaikh Muhammad Husain was a religious scholar and a pious person. Mutahhari received his elementary education in theology from his father.

When he was twelve years of age, he joined the conventional Islamic School at Mashhad and pursued his studies there for five years. Then he proceeded to Qum, the famous Educational Centre of Shi’ah Muslims. He stayed there for fifteen years and completed his education under the supervision of Allamah Tabatabai, Imam Khumayni and many other distinguished ulema.

During the period of his education Prof. Mutahhari felt that the communists wanted to destroy the very spirit of Islam by mixing their atheistic views with the Islamic philosophy and interpreting the verses of the Holy Qur’an in a materialistic manner. Of course, communism was misguiding the young generation, which prompted the professor to nip this threat in the bud.

He wrote extensively against the baneful effects of communism. He also wrote on exegesis, philosophy, ethics, sociology, history and many other subjects. He left over twenty books that have been published in Persian, Arabic, Turkish, Urdu and English. The Islamic Seminary has had the honour of publishing some of them.

In 1952, he established a council of university students in Tehran and, in 1955, began teaching theology at the University of Tehran at the doctorate level continuing until 1978. He remained faithful to his socio-political commitments. In 1963, he was arrested along with Imam Khumayni. After the exile of Imam Khumayni to Turkey, he took active part in the leadership of the Islamic movement, making decisive contributions to the mobilization of the combatant ulema.

After the success of Islamic Revolution in Iran he was nominated as the President of the Constitutional Council and was performing his duties in a very befitting manner.

The activities of this scholar were intolerable for the followers of the atheistic schools and they, therefore, decided to remove him from the scene by terroristic methods. Eventually they assassinated this eminent scholar on May 1, 1979. His martyrdom was a great tragedy. When the sad news was conveyed to Imam Khumayni he could not control his tears. In his condolence message he said: “In him I have lost a dear son. I am mourning the death of one who was the fruition of my life.”

Thousands and thousands of Muslims escorted his funeral. He was laid to rest in Qum in the precincts of the Holy Shrine of Ma’suma in Qum. May his soul rest in peace.

Prologue

The question of fate and destiny that forms the subject matter of this book is a philosophical question, and should normally be looked for in the books of philosophy. But here in this book it has been taken out of its proper context and placed along with some other questions.

All scientific and philosophical questions are classed in accordance with the subject with which they deal or the purpose for which they are studied.

The reason why the philosophical questions form one class, the mathematical another and the physical a third, is that there is a special common link between the questions dealt with by each set of these questions or at least there exists some common theoretical or practical objects which may be achieved by its study.

The question of destiny and fate is classed as a philosophical question. But in this book it has grouped with the questions with which it is connected neither with regard to its subject nor with regard to the object of its study.

Here this question is being studied under the heading of “The causes of the decline of the Muslims”. This heading includes multifarious subjects, events and questions, some of them being historical, others psychological, moral, social or purely religious. A few of them are philosophical also. Thus a large number of subjects belonging to various classes and categories form a part of this study.

The only link which binds these subjects together is their positive or negative effects on the progress and the decline of the Muslim society.

The aim of raising this question in this book is to see whether a belief in destiny as required by philosophical reasoning is one of those ideas which lead their adherents to lethargy and lack of vigor. Are the people who believe in it automatically dragged to decline and decay or is it a doctrine which has no bad effect provided it is expounded in a sound manner. It is also to seen how Islam has presented this question and with what effect on its followers. This being the only aim of those aspects of the question which have no bearing on it, have been left out.

I do not remember exactly since when I have been interested in the question of the causes of the decline of the Muslims and have been thinking about it. But it may be claimed with certainty that for the past few years, this question has been engaging my attention. During this period I have either myself been thinking over it or reading what others have written.

Whenever I came across a writing on this subject, I read it with interest and tried to comprehend the view-point of the writer. This was my practice till one day while I was talking about and authentic hadith accepted by both the Shi’ah and Sunnis, to the effect that: “Islam is to have an upper hand; it is not to be suppressed”.

I realized that what I had read or heard till then, though useful, was not convincing. As I found that like me my listeners were also deeply interested in the subject, I decided to study it more thoroughly and minutely. I felt that any improvement in the present position of the Muslim world largely depended on ascertaining the causes of its decline. For this purpose it was necessary not only to study as far as possible the views of others, both Muslims and non-Muslims, but to make a comprehensive study of all the relevant subjects including those which have not so far been studied from this angle.

It was here that I was struck by the vast magnitude of the problem. I realized that it was not possible for one individual to make a scientific inquiry into all the relevant subjects. This job at least required many long years. Anyhow I decided to do the preliminary work and then to study one or two subjects in detail as a test case. If some other people apply themselves to other subjects, it is hoped that a useful study of an important social subject will be completed with a sort of joint effort and mutual co-operation.

There is no doubt that the Muslims have left behind the most brilliant period of their history. At one time they were not only the rulers of the world, but, what is more important, were the standard-bearers of human culture. The world has witnessed many rulers and conquerors who imposed their will on others for some time, but before long they were wiped out like froth of water. That was not the case with the Muslims. They brought about an unparalleled intellectual awakening and founded a brilliant culture which lasted for several centuries. It is still celebrated as a golden link of the chain of human culture, and history itself is proud of the illustrious achievement of the Muslims. For so many centuries the Muslims excelled in sciences, crafts, philosophy, art, morals and higher social order throughout the world. Others have borrowed much from them. Many unbiased investigators have admitted that the wonderful civilization of modern Europe which today runs supreme in the whole world was inspired by the magnificent Islamic culture.

Gustave Le Bon says: “Some Europeans feel shy to admit that a heathen nation is responsible for their emergence from barbarism and ignorance, and for that reason they conceal this fact. But their unreasonable attitude is extremely regrettable……….It was the moral influence of the Muslim Arabs that humanized the European people who had toppled the Roman Empire. It opened the door of sciences, arts and philosophy to those who were totally ignorant of such things. These Arabs were for 600 years the teachers of us, the Europeans”.

Will Durant in his “History of Civilization” says:

“The inception and decline of Islamic culture has been a big historical event. During the five centuries from 81 A.H. to 594 A.H. Islam was the world champion in regards to military power, law and order, good morals, developed life, human and just laws, religious tolerance, literature, scientific investigation, medicine and philosophy.

He further says: The Muslim world exercised its influence on the Christian world in various ways. From Muslim countries, Europe imported food, syrups, medicines, weapons, tools, artistic taste, industrial and commercial methods, laws and maritime practices. It also borrowed from the Muslim languages. The Arab (Muslim) scholars learnt Greek, mathematics, physics, chemistry, astronomy and medicine. They further developed them and conveyed the Greek heritage in a richer form to Europe. The Arab (Muslim) physicians preserved the works of Aristotle for Christian Europe and incidentally altered them. From among the oriental philosophers Avicenna (Ibn Sina) and Averroes (Ibn Rushd) influenced the European philosophers. Their skill was as reliable as that of the Greeks………This Muslim influence penetrated to Europe through trade, the crusades, the translation of thousands of books from Arabic to Latin and the travelling of the European scholars to Andalus.

He also says: Only during golden epochs of history a society is able to produce in a short time all such luminaries in the field of politics, education, literature, language, geography, history, mathematics, astronomy, chemistry, philosophy, medicine etc. as were produced by Islam during the four centuries from the time of Harun al-Rashid to that of Averroes. A part of the brilliant activities of the Muslim was based on the works of the Greeks, but a major portion of them especially in the fields of politics, poetry and art was strikingly original”.

It was an admitted fact that the illustrious phenomenon known as ‘Islamic culture’ continued to exist for centuries before it vanished. Today the Muslims as compared to many other nations and to their own glorious past are in a pitiable state of decline and backwardness.

Naturally a question arises as to why the Muslims have retrograded after making all these achievements in sciences, arts, crafts and organizational matters. What is the cause of their decline and retrogression and who is responsible for their present pitiable state? Is it the fault of certain individuals or groups? Or was it because of certain events that the Muslims deviated from their original course? Is it natural that every nation makes progress during a limited period and then as a matter of course its decline begins?

If it is admitted that some particular factor has been responsible for the decline of the Muslims, we must identify that factor. Some Europeans (not all) who are biased because of their Christian prejudice or their imperialistic propensities blame Islam itself for the backwardness of the Muslims. Are they right? Or is it that instead of Islam, the Muslims are to be blamed? Or is it that the fault lies with those non-Muslim nations which have in various ways come in contact with Muslims during the past fourteen centuries? The answer to these questions is not a simple affair. It requires a comparatively lengthy discussion. Every alternative is to be weighed and investigated scientifically.

Before entering into this discussion, the following preliminary points are naturally to be considered:

• The extent of the glory and splendour and Islamic culture.

• The causes that led to the flourishing of Islamic culture.

• Islam’s contribution to the progress of the Muslims.

• Contribution of the Islamic culture to the modern European culture.

• The present position of the Muslim world as indicated by the signs of its backwardness.

• Though Islamic culture has disappeared, Islam is still a living, active and expanding force, and rivals the most powerful new social and revolutionary forces.

• Muslim people are awakening and are trying to stand on their own feet again.

After completing this preliminary discussion which requires a separate book, it is necessary to undertake a deep philosophical discussion of the nature of time to ascertain whether it is true, as claimed by some philosophers of history, that what causes the progress and advancement of a nation, causes its decline also. In other words, every factor can only under certain conditions related to a particular period, push forward a society, and with a change in the circumstances and with the beginning of a new era of history, it loses its vitality and ceases to be a pushing force. Then it automatically becomes the cause of its decline.

Should this philosophy be true, every culture should disappear because of the same factors which contributed to its promotion. There is no need of the introduction of any foreign factor. All old factors are, to say, reactionary, and new factors progressive. New social factors give rise to a new culture which by its very nature is different from the old one.

Should this rule be true, naturally the Islamic culture cannot be an exception to it. In that case it is useless to discuss the cause of the decline of the Muslims, for they cannot be discussed independently and in isolation from the factors which gave rise to Muslim culture.

According to this philosophy it is not necessary to hold any person, group or event responsible for the decline of the Muslims. Islamic culture disappeared, because every culture has to disappear one day. Every living phenomenon has sooner or later to die its natural or unnatural death. Islamic culture too was born. It grew. It matured. It superannuated and then died. To wish for its revival is tantamount to wishing for the revival of the dead; which is not natural and can be effected only by some miraculous cause, the bringing about of which is after all beyond human control.

After a preliminary study of the various aspects of the glory and decline of the Muslims we come to this important philosophical-historical question which cannot be overlooked, for in this connection there was already been much worthless talk, and many people have been influenced by immature views.

The philosophical study of this question will be incomplete unless the question of the conformity of Islam to the requirements of the time is also thoroughly investigated. This discussion will naturally consist of two parts: the first part will be purely philosophical and the second one Islamic. Both the parts are worth consideration under one heading, ‘Islam and the requirements of time’.

When I finished this study I came to the conclusion that the above mentioned philosophical rule was untenable. I could not believe that the causes of the decline of the Muslims were necessarily the same as those of their progress. Now the time has come that we should study the causes of the stagnation, decline and backwardness of the Muslims and see what others have said in this connection.

Considering what others, both Muslims and non-Muslims, have said and keeping in view the questions and the events which are naturally to be considered in this connection, this study will have to be undertaken in three sections:

• Section of Islam

• Section of Muslims

• Section of Foreign factors

Each section consists of a number of subjects and questions. For example, someone may hold the Islamic tenets to be responsible for the decline of the Muslims. Some others may think that the moral system of Islam producers degenerating effect. Still some others may maintain that the social laws of Islam are the real causes of the decline of the Muslims.

Incidentally, this charge has actually been leveled against certain doctrines, moral principles and social laws of Islam.

Similarly in the other two sections also there are many questions which are to be considered.

In this connection, the following Islamic tenets and doctrines have to be especially considered:

• Belief in fate and destiny

• Belief in the hereafter and the disparagement of this worldly life

• Intercession

• Dissimulation

• Expectation of solace (the advent of Mahdi (a) - the Occult Imam)

Out of these five doctrines the first three are common between the Shi’ah.

Sometimes it is said that the real cause of the decline of the Muslims is their belief in fate and destiny. And sometimes it is said that the importance which Islam attaches to the next world and its ever lasting life has diverted the attention of the Muslims from the problems of life. Again some people say that the belief in intercession, which has existed during all periods of Islamic history and which has been upheld by all Muslims except a few, has made the Muslims indifferent to the sins. The only deterrent against the sins is the fear of their evil consequences. As the Muslims hope for intercession, they feel no need to abstain from any vice or crime.

The two doctrines peculiar to the Shi’ah, the dissimulation and the expectation of solace are also criticized in this connection. It is said that the doctrine of dissimulation in the first place means hypocrisy and double-facedness, and in the second it has rendered the Shi’ah timid, weak and unable to face the facts of life boldly. In connection with the expectation of solace (See: The Awaited Saviour, ISP 1979) it is said that this doctrine has deprived the Shi’ah of every initiative to improve their condition. While all other nations of the world are making efforts to improve their lot, the Shi’ah are waiting for the appearance of a saviour.

Out of the Islamic moral principles, austerity, contentment, patience, satisfaction, submission to the will of Allah and trust in Him have been charged with having a hand in the decadence of the Muslims.

Out of the administrative rules of Islam which fall in this category, the most important is the question of government. According to some critics Islam has failed to determine the duties of the Muslims clearly in this respect.

The penal laws of Islam have since long been ignored by the Muslims, and the Muslim countries have replaced them with the alien laws, though with unfortunate results. Nevertheless the penal laws of Islam are still begin criticized.

Two provisions of the Islamic civil law have been especially criticized during the modern times. One of them is the question of the rights of women and the other that of the economic laws of Islam in respect of property and inheritance.

Many people feel upset by the restrictions imposed by Islam on the relations between the Muslims and the non-Muslims, such as the rules in respect of marriage between a Muslim and a non-Muslim, meat of the animal slaughtered by a non-Muslim and the uncleanliness of the infidels as described in Islamic jurisprudence. These questions are regarded as the factors contributing to the backwardness of the Muslims.

These are the subjects in the section of Islam which need investigation and thorough study.

Fortunately favorable conditions for such an investigation exist now and it is possible to clarify these questions and remove any doubts about them lurking in the mind of the young and the educated classes.

Next section is that of the Muslims. In this section our attention is concentrated on the Muslims instead of Islam. In other words, we ascertain if it is true, that it is the Muslims themselves who are responsible for their decadence by deviating from the teachings of Islam.

In this section also we face many questions. First of all we have to determine what are the points of deviation and to find out what teachings of Islam have been abandoned by the Muslims and which practices foreign to Islam have been adopted by them. Secondly, we have to see whether the Muslims generally are responsible for their decadence or only leading sections of them.

It is known that Islam first appeared among the Arabs and thereafter spread to other nations such as the Iranians, the Indians, the Copts, the Berbers etc. All these people had their own national, racial and historic characteristics. It is to be seen whether these people or some of them influenced Islam through their characteristics and diverted it from its original course in such a way that if it had gone to some other nations, for example the Europeans, the destiny of Islamism and the Muslims would have been different today. Or is it that the Muslim masses had no role in this respect and whatever damage has been done to Islam and the Muslims, was wrought by the two influential classes, namely, the rulers and the divines.

In the section of foreign factors there are many events which must attract attention. From the very beginning Islam has always faced the hostility of its internal and external enemies. The Jews, the Christians, the Zoroastrians, the Manicheans and the heretics among the Muslims themselves, were not idle. They stabbed Islam in the back whenever they got an opportunity. Many of them played an active role in distorting the Islamic facts by fabricating hadiths (traditions) or by creating new sects and sowing the seeds of dissention. If they could do nothing else, they fanned the differences among the Muslims.

In Islamic history we come across many political or religious movements started by the non-Muslims with a view to weakening or obliterating Islam.

Occasionally the Muslim world was subjected to a large scale invasion also. The crusades and the Mongol invasion are the outstanding examples.

The western imperialism did even more harm during the past few centuries. It sucked the blood of the Muslims and sapped their energy under the pressure of its oppressive policies.

Imam Khumayni, the leader of the oppressed nations of the world has said:

“The Muslims of the world should make a united effort to regain the lost glory of Islam.

It should be clearly remembered by one and all that those who spur up disunity among the ranks of the Muslims are neither Sunnis nor Shi’ahs; they are lackeys of the imperialists whose only aim is to destroy Islam.”

In view of what has been stated above, the subjects which should be considered are the following:

Spectacular progress of the Muslims and their decline. (This subject is preliminary to the rest of the study)

Islam and the requirements of time. (This subject has two parts: the first is related to the philosophy of history and the second deals with the application of the Islamic rules in the changing circumstances. This study also has a preliminary aspect)

Fate and destiny

Belief in the hereafter and its effect on the progress and decline

Intercession

Dissimulation

Expectation of solace

Moral system of Islam

Islamic view about the government

Islamic economy

Penal laws of Islam

Rights of woman in Islam

International law of Islam

Points of deviation

Forgery and fabrication of hadiths

Shi’ah-Sunni differences and their contribution to the decline of the Muslims

Ash’arism and Mu’tazilism

Stagnation and ijtihad

Philosophy and mysticism (irfan)

Rulers of the Muslim world

Leadership of ulema

Subversive activities of the minorities in the Muslim world

Crusades

Fall of Andalus

Mongol invasion

Imperialism

These are the subjects which in my view should be included in this study. I do not claim to be exhaustive or to have been able to arrange them in an ideal order. There may possibly be some other subjects which should have been included in this list but have been missed by me. I know that I have neither capacity nor time to deal with all these subjects alone, but in some of them, including No. 1 and 2, I have prepared notes and hope to be able to publish them as early as possible.

I shall be highly obliged if some other writers and eminent scholars could choose a subject of their liking, carry out necessary investigations.

Some twenty years back when I first noticed that the Europeans regard the belief in fate and destiny as a cause or even the main cause of the decadence of the Muslims, I was still a student at the Islamic Educational Centre at Qum.

I was reading the second volume of the “Life of Muhammad” by Muhammad Hasnain Heikal. The final portion of the book consisted of two articles.

- Islamic culture as explained by the Qur’an

- Orientalists and Islamic culture.

In the course of the second article he has reproduced what the well-known American writer, Washington Irving has said in his book about the Holy Prophet (s). According to Heikal, towards the end of his book after explaining the Islamic tenets about faith in Allah, the Angels, the Scriptures, the Prophets and the Day of Resurrection, Washington Irving said:

“The last and the sixth fundamental principle of Islam is that of predestination. Muhammad used it for the advancement of his warfare, for according to his rule every event which occurs in the world is already predetermined in the knowledge of God and is recorded in the ‘protected tablet’. The destiny of everybody and the time of his death are predetermined and unalterable. Nothing can advance or delay an event. The Muslims who believed in these points and regarded them as indisputable, attacked the enemy fearlessly during a battle. They looked upon death during a fighting to be equal to martyrdom, which ensured Paradise. That is why they were sure of victory in either case, whether they were killed or overpowered the enemy.

Of course, there are some Muslims who consider the theory of predestination, which says that man is not free to avoid sins, to be contrary to the justice and mercy of God. Certain sects have emerged which have tried and are still trying to explain and modify the doctrine of predestination, but their number is small and they are not considered to be the followers of the practice of the Prophet……….. There could be no doctrine better than that which could drive the uninformed and self-conceited soldiers to the battlefield, and assure them of spoils if they survived and of Paradise if they were killed. This belief made the Muslim soldiers so bold and mighty that no other soldiers could rival them. But still this belief was a poison which annihilated the influence of Islam in the long run. When the successors of the Prophet gave up the policy of fighting wars and making conquests, and sheathed their swords, the doctrine of predestination revealed its devastating characteristics. Peace and tranquillity weakened the nerves of the Muslims.

The material comforts allowed by Islam, which distinguish this religion from Christianity, a religion of purity and self-negation, also had their effect. The Muslims ascribed all their sufferings and hardships to fate and regarded it as their duty to bear them patiently. According to them and any human effort and knowledge was of no avail in getting rid of them. The followers of Muhammad gave no importance to the golden rule: ‘God helps those who help themselves’. That is why the Cross replaced the Crescent. If the Crescent still has some influence in Europe, that is because the big Christian powers want that to be so. In other words the influence of the Crescent is due to the mutual of its influence is a fresh proof of the maxim that anything gained by the power of sword, is taken away by the power of sword only.”

Heikal in reply to this American has given a detailed explanation according to his own thinking and taste. His explanation, though it contains many good points, is not methodical, and hence it is controversial and can be refuted.

In this book we propose to prove the baselessness of the statement of Washington Irving and other Europeans and show that the doctrine of fate and destiny is miles apart from the theory of predestination. We will show that the same soldiers of early Islam whom Mr. Washington Irving arrogantly describes as uninformed and self-conceited, were fully aware of the difference which he is unable to comprehend.

Secondly, the Qur’an itself has supported human liberty in a number of its verses. Those who advocated the doctrine of free will and described the theory of predestination as opposed to the justice and mercy of Allah (viz. The Shi’ah and the Mu`tazilites), contrary to the assertion of the orientalists, did not go against the teachings of the Qur’an, nor did they modify what the Qur’an had said. Actually they derived their view from the Qur’an itself.

Thirdly, this great writer who, according to Heikal is a biased Christian and who calls Christianity a religion of purity and self-negation because unlike Islam it has given no heed to the problems of life, refers to the eternal Divine knowledge sarcastically.

Is it possible that a person believing in God may deny His eternal knowledge of everything? Is it a fault of the Qur’an that it describes Allah as All-Knowing?

Fourthly, he says that the followers of Muhammad did not give importance to the rule that ‘God helps those who help themselves’.

This writer did not take the trouble of reading a translation of the Holy Qur’an even once, otherwise he would not have made such a frivolous assertion. The Qur’an expressly says: “As for him who desires the hereafter, strives for it as he should, and is a true believer, it is such people whose efforts shall be appreciated by Allah. We help both these and those with the favour of your Lord and more is deprived of it (in this world)”. (Surah Isra’, 17:19-20)

The followers of Muhammad attained even a higher stage of self-reliance, when they believed in the teaching of the Qur’an saying: “If you help Allah, He will help you and will make your foothold firm”. (Surah Muhammad, 47:7) The Qur’an did not say: “If you help yourselves. .” because that expression would have smacked of cupidity and personal profit. Instead it has used the expression: “If you help Allah”, which has a general and human aspect and implies service to humanity.

As for the ascendancy of the Cross over the Crescent, which is regarded by Washington Irving as final and everlasting, we will discuss this point later at a suitable place in this book.

These views are not peculiar to Mr. Washington Irving. Similar views have been expressed by almost all other European writers, including those who appear to be unbiased to a certain extent. They all agree that Islam is a predestinarian creed. The only difference is that some of them do not regard this as a factor responsible for the decadence of the Muslims, whereas some others maintain that it is. Some European authors have even declared it to be main cause of the decline of the Muslims.

Will Durant in his “History of Civilization” after referring to the Qur’anic verses regarding the omnipotence and knowledge of Allah says: Predestinarianism is an essential part of Islamic thinking. In consequence of this belief the faithful endured the severest hardships of life with equanimity. But during the last few centuries it has blocked the progress of the Arabs and numbered their thinking power.

In contrast, Gustave Le Bon maintains that the belief in predestination was not a cause of the decline of the Muslims, and that the causes of their decline should be looked for somewhere else.

At first I intended to mention all the points connected with the progress and the decline of the Muslims in the introduction prefixed to this book. But later I gave up the idea, for if the necessary details of all the points were given, the introduction would have become lengthier than the main book and if brevity was observed that would not have served the purpose. Hence I preferred to be contented with what has been mentioned as an illustration. The details may be given in a separate treatise.

In this book, not all the points and the questions related to fate and destiny have been mentioned, because the aim is only to study whether this doctrine has actually been a cause of the decline of the Muslims. Hence certain aspects of this question which appeared to be irrelevant for our present purpose, have been omitted.

The question of fate has a long history among the Muslims. The expounders of the Qur’an, the scholastic theologians, the philosophers, the mystics, and even the poets and the literary figures have all discussed this question. An account of the views expressed by them requires an independent book. Besides, this question is covered by a large number of the Qur’anic verses and the hadiths (traditions) which are a model of the depth of Islamic knowledge. These very verses and hadiths have guided the Muslim philosophers and have enriched the Islamic philosophy to the extent pre-Islamic Greek philosophy paled in comparison to it.

Furthermore, there exist some other connected questions in the Islamic teachings that are not easy to explain by means of logical reasoning. One such point is Laylah al-Qadr (The Night of Destiny) which has been expressly mentioned in the Holy Qur’an, and about which there is no difference of opinion between the Shi’ah and the Sunnis. Another point is that of Bada’ (Divine exposition), which is an indisputable Shi’ah doctrine based on the Qur’anic text. (See: The Beliefs of the Shi’ite School, the forthcoming Seminary Publication).

Predestination, free will and human liberty are the questions which if considered from various psychological, moral, philosophical and social angles, will require too lengthy a discussion.

It is hoped this book will prove useful and interesting to the inquisitive reader, and it would also remove his doubts in regard to the subject discussed, and would enlighten him to an appreciable degree.

True Meaning of the Traditions

It is abundantly clear from the last report quoted above that the word Tahrif (displacing the words of Allah from their rightful places) denotes the variations brought about by the qaris who most of the time based their mode of recitations on their own opinions. We have made it plain from the very outset that such a tampering has definitely occurred, where a particular Qari has read a particular word differently though without effecting any change in the original text or its essence. Whether we subscribe to the so called, seven modes of recitations or not, there is no doubt that such a tampering took place. In fact, there are many renderings, each based on the reader's guess and conjecture, which have changed the pronunciations and the recitations. In any case, this report does not support the view of Tahrif as the alteration, addition, omission or interpolation in the Qur'an.

The remaining traditions clearly point out that the word Tahrif used in them mean the misinterpretation of the verses. One of the results was that the excellence of Ahl ul-Bayt (‘a) was denied, and hostility towards them encouraged. This is further supported by the sermon of Imam Husayn (‘a) quoted above when those who were gathered to kill him are described as perpetrators of Tahrif.

In the tradition reported from al-Kafi, Imam Muhammad al Baqir (‘a) says:

"And one of the examples of their repudiation of the Book is that while they upheld the words they distorted its injunctions".

Well, we have repeatedly said that Tahrif in this fashion has indisputably occurred in relation to the Qur'an. Had it not been so, the rights of Ahl ul-Bayt (‘a) would have remained protected, and the reverence for them by the Prophet (‘s) would have been honoured. The events would not have taken the tragic turn the way they did, resulting in the usurpation of their rights and in the Prophet's inconsolable grief.

The secondtype of traditions are those which state that the names of aimma (Imams) had originally appeared in certain verses of the Qur’an. These are quite a few. Among them is a report in al-Kafi by its own chain of narrators from Muhammad b. Fudhail that Abul Hasan (Imam Ali b. Musa Ridha (‘a) ) said:

"The wilayah of Ali b. Abi Talib found mention in every book of the Prophets. No Prophet was sent without a covenant of Muhammad's (‘s) prophethood and his rightful successor's wilayah, peace be upon them and their progeny"

And there is a report by al-Ayyashi with his chain of reporters from as-Sadiq (‘a);

"If the Qur'an were to be read the way it was revealed, we would be found therein by our names".

Further reports of this nature are in al-Kafi, tafsir of Al-Ayyashi, reporting from Abu Ja’far (‘a) and again in Kanzul Fawaid with its several chains of reporters from Ibn Abbas, and also in tafsir of Furat b. Ibrahim al Kafi with its own chain of narrators. It reports from Asbagh b. Nubatah having heard from Amirul Mu'mineen (Ali b. Abi Talib (‘a))

"The Qur'an was revealed in four quarters: a quarter about us, a quarter about our adversaries, a quarter about traditions and parables, a quarter about the obligations and the laws. Ours was the most vital part of the Qur'an".

And al-Kafi has also reported with its own chain of reporters from Abu Ja'far (Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (‘a))

"Jibra’ill came with this ayah to Muhammad in this way:

وان كنتم في ريب مما نزلنا على عبدنا – في علي- فأتوا بسورة من مثلة

In reply to all these, we have clarified earlier that some parts of the revelations to the Prophet did not constitute the Qur’an; they were elucidatory. The reports which say that certain verses contained the names of Aimma (‘a) could be such elucidatory additions. But if this interpretation does not seem plausible or probable, then the reports must be totally rejected as false and fabricated, because they would be deemed to be against the Qur'an, the traditions, and the aforementioned evidence which disprove Tahrif. There are acknowledged and continuous auth­entic reports which direct us to discard and reject all those reports which contradict the Qur'an.

One of the most convincing proofs that the name of Amir al Mu'minin (‘a) was never openly mentioned in the Qur'an is the tradition of al-Ghadir. On that occasion, the Prophet (‘s), as commanded by Allah appointed Ali after a revela­tion which placed great emphasis on it, and promised the Prophet (‘s) that he would be guarded from evil men. If Ali's name had been openly there in the Qur'an, there would have been no need to declare an appointment, nor would it be necessary to make an elaborate arrangement for Muslims to assemble, or for Allah to assuage his fear that the declaration could cause him any harm.

The authenticity of Ghadir is enough to prove that these reports about the names of Aimma (‘a) in the Qur'an are untrue; especially so because the event of Ghadir occurred in the farewell Hajj of the Prophet (‘s) during his last days. By that time, most of the Qur'an had been revealed and had gained currency among the Muslim populace.

Moreover, the last report from al-Kafi seems to be highly improbable by its very contents. The abrupt mention of Ali where Allah wishes to prove the truth about Muhammad (‘s) by presenting the challenge of Qur'as an inimitable Book, seems quite irrelevant.

All these reports arerendered useless and invalid by one authentic tradition from Abu Abdillah, Imam Ja’far as-Sadiq (‘a) reported by al-Kafi from Abu Basir. He says: "I asked Abu Abdillah (‘a) about the ayah:

واطيعوا الله واطيعوا الرسول وأولي الأمر منكم

He said the verse was revealed for Ali b. Abi Talib, Hasan and Husayn (peacebe upon them)".

I said: "People ask why the names of Ali and his family are not mentioned in the Book of Allah". He answered:

"Tell them that the Prophet (‘s) received the revelation for Salat, but Allah never specified the number of raka’ats as three or four. It was the Prophet (‘s) who made its meaning manifest for them ...."

This authentic tradition decides the merit of all those reports and clarifies their possible meaning: the name of Amir al Mum­inin (‘a) in those revelations could be just an elucidation, not to be imparted as a part of the Our'an. Besides, those who refused to swear oath of allegiance for Abu Bakr never substantiated their argument by saying that Ali had been men­tioned in the Qur'an. No doubt, had it been so, this would have been their strongest stand. And let us not forget that the collection of the Our'an, as believed by those who argue against us, saw its completion soon after the question of khilafah was decided. All these are pointers to the fact that the names were never included in the verses.

The thirdtype of reports are those which mention that there have been some additions or omissions in the Qur'an, and that, after the Prophet's death, people replaced some words in the Qur'an with the others.

Ali b. Ibrahim al-Qummi has reported with his chain of narrators from Hurayz who says: "Abu Abdillah (‘a) read this ayah as:

صراط من أنعمت عليهم غير المغضوب عليهم وغير الضالين

Al-Ayyashi reports from Hisham b. Salim:

"I asked Abu Abdillah (‘a) about this ayah

ان الله اصطفى آدم ونوحا وآل ابراهيم وآل عمران على العالمين

He said: "It isآلعمران They have changed one name for the other. They have substituted آل محمد for آل ابراهيم .

Besides the weakness and unreliability of the reporters, these reports are all unacceptable and false because they are against the Qur'an, the Sunnah and the consensus of Muslims who hold that there has not been an addition of even one letter in the Qur'an. Even those who advocate Tahrif do not believe that there has been any addition. A group of Ulama’ have claimed a consensus on the fact that there has been no addition to the Qur'an and that which exists between the two covers is nothing but the Qur'an. Among them are Sheikh Mufid, Sheikh Tusi, Sheikh Bahai and other great Ulama’, may He bless them. And we have quoted earlier from al-Ihtijaj which also reiterates that there has been no addition.

The fourthtype of reports claim that there has occurred Tahrif in the Qur'an by way of omission only. To them we say that they have to interpret such reports the same way as those concerning the elucidatory additions in the codex prepared by Amir alMominin( ‘a). And if that sounds improbable, then the reports must be rejected as false because they are against the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Most of the reports in this vein are weak, while falsehood of some of them is evident from their content. The Ulama’ have therefore guided us to either subject them to interpretations or reject them altogether.

Muhaqqiq Al-Kalbasi has said: "All those reports which speak of Tahrif are against the consensus of Ummah and therefore unreliable - except for those who do not rely upon the con­sensus". And then he proceeds to say: "The belief in any omission having occurred in the Qur'an is baseless. Had it been true, it would have become popular and acknowledged, because such an important occurrence could not pass unnoticed".

The commentator of al-Wafiyah, Muhaqqiq al-Baghdadi, has further clarified this by quoting from Muhaqqiq al-Karaki who had written a complete tract on the subject. He says:

"The reports which speak of omissions must either be interpreted or rejected. Any tradition which is contradictory to the Qur'an, the acknowledgedsunnah and the consensus, must be discarded if it has no room for interpretation or other justifications.

I say: Muhaqqiq al-Karaki has pointed towards what we have said earlier, about the clear directive from authentic traditions regarding the rejection of all those reports which are in dis­agreement with the Qur'an.”

Among those traditions is the one reported by Sheikh as­ Saduq Muhammad b. Ali b. Husayn with his reliable chain of narrators from as-Sadiq (‘a):

"To exercise restraint when in doubt is better than rushing intoa jeopardy . Upon every truth there is divine light. Accept that which conformswith the Book of Allah, and leave aside that which goes against it ...."1

And Sheikh Saeed b. Hibatullah, al Qutb ar-Rawandi, has reported with his authentic chain of narrators from as-Sadiq (‘a),

"when you come across two opposing reports, expose them before the Book of Allah. Accept that which conformswith the Book of Allah and reject that which goes against it."2

The Fourth Doubt

This emanates from the way the collection of the Qur'an is described, making it possible for one to assume that Tahrif was inevitable. We now proceed to another chapter on this, so that this doubt is also allayed.

Notes

1. Al- Wasail Vol 3.

2. Al- Wasail Vol 3.

A Reflection on the Collection of the Holy Qur’an

The question how the Qur'an was collected into a book form is amongthose topics which has led some to believe in interpol­ation or tampering having occurred in the Qur'an. The process, as generally described, makes such changes appear inevitable.

It was therefore necessary to attend to this discussion with a view to establishing that no interpolation, alterations or omis­sions have occurred in the Qur'an.

Actually, the pristine quality of the Qur'an became doubtful because it was believed that Abu Bakr ordered its compilation after 70 reciters of the Qur'an were killed in the battle of Bir Maunah, and four hundred in the battle of Yamamah. Fearing that the Qur'an would be lost and forgotten by the believers, Umar and Zaid b. Thabit undertook the task of collection from scripts found on palm branches, pieces of cloth and covers, and also from the memory of the Muslims, provided that two witnesses gave testimony that it was from the Qur'an. There are several reports which indicate that such an exercise was indeed carried out. When a compiler is not infallible, one can safely expect an element of error to creep in. Those who compile the widely scattered poems of one single poet could give you various versions of the couplets. These variations are usual, leading finally to the belief that some tampering has occurred. It is quite possible that someone, in spite of having actually heard the Prophet (peacebe upon him and his progeny) recite verses from the Qur'an, did not venture to present them because he could not provide two witnesses. Thus, an omission becomes quite probable.

The answer to this is that the doubt becomes valid only if the reports about compilation of Qur'an are deemed credible. So, it is imperative that we mention those reports and analyse them critically.

The Traditions about the Compilation of the Qur’an

Report n. 1

1. Zaid b. Thabit says:

"Abu Bakr sent for me after the battle of Yamamah, and I found Umar also present. Abu Bakr said: `Umar has come to tell me that the day of Yamamah has been hard for the reciters of the Qur'an, and he fears that other such occasions may be harder still, resulting in the loss of greater part of the Qur'an. He says I must give orders for compilation of the Qur'an. I told Umar that how could he do a thing which the Messenger of Allah did not do? Umar said: "But this, by God, is desirable". And Umar has been referring this matter to me persistently, till at last Allah opened up my chest for thatundertaking, and I began to hold the same view as Umar's.

Zaid says:

"Abu Bakr said: `You are a young intelligent man, and we find no fault in you. You were also a scribe, writing down the revelations for the Messenger of Allah. So attend to the Qur'an, and compile it'. By God, if they had entrusted me with removing a mountain from among the mountains, the task would not have been heavier for me than that of collecting and compiling the Qur'an. I asked: `Why do you undertake someth­ing the Prophet himself never did?' He answered: `By God, this is desirable'. And then Abu Bakr never left me without re­minders, till Allah opened up my chest, the way He did for Abu Bakr and Umar, and I attended to the work, compiling the Qur'an from palm-branches, pieces of cloth, and from the memory of the people, till I found the last part of Surah al-Tawbah with Abu Khuzaimah Al Ansari, which no one else had.

لقد جاءكم رسول من انفسكم عزيز عليه ما عنتم حريص عليكم بالمؤمنين رؤوف رحيم. فان تولوا فقل حسبي الله لا اله الا هو علية توكلت وهو رب العرش العظيم

till the end of Bara’ah. These compiled pages were with Abu Bakr till he died, then with Umar in his lifetime, and then with Hafsa, daughter of Umar".1

Report n. 2

2. Ibn Shihab reports from Anas b. Malik:

“When Huzaifah b. al-Yaman, with the Iraqis, was fighting the people of Syria, in the conquest of Armenia and Azerb­aijan, he once came to Uthman and expressed his fears about variations in the recitations of Qur'an. Huzaifa told Uthman: `O master of the faithfuls! Come to the rescue of this ummah, before it is entangled into disagreements about the Book, the same way as Christians and Jews have been.

`Uthman sent a message to Hafsa asking her to submit the notes of Qur'an she held so that they could be copied into books, promising that they would be returned to her care and trust. Hafsa submitted the notes to Uthman who ordered Zaid b. Thabit, Abdullah b. az-Zubair, Saeed b. al-Aas, Abdur­ Rahman b. al-Harth b. Hisham, to transcribe. And Uthman told the group of three Qureishites: `If you differ with Zaid b. Thabit on any parts of the Qur'an, write down according to the dialect of Qureish, because it has come down in their dialect'.

`So they did the work, and when they had transcribed the notes into the books, Uthman returned the notes to Hafsa. Then he sent a copy to every place, ordering that all other versions of the Qur'an, found in pages or books must be set on fire'.

Ibn Shihab says:

"Kharijah b. Zaid b. Thabit informed me that he heard Zaid b. Thabit report the following: `When we were copying the notes, I found that an ayah from the Surah Al-Ahzab was missing. It was an ayah I had been hearing the Messenger of Allah himself recite. So we went in search of it, and found it with Khuzaimah b. Thabit al-Ansari:

من المؤمنين رجال صدقوا ماعاهدوا الله عليه

and we added it to its Surah in the book.2

Report n. 3

3. Ibn Abi Shaybah, on his ownchain , of authorities, reports from Ali:

"Abu Bakr deserves the best reward for the copies of Qur'an, for he was the first one to compile what exists between the two covers".

Report n. 4

4. Ibn Shihab reports from Salim b. Abdillah and Kharijah:

"Abu Bakr had compiled the Qur'an in some papers, and then asked Zaid b. Thabit to go through them. Zaid refused, till Abu Bakr asked Umar to intervene. So Zaid agreed. These books were with Abu Bakr till he died, then with Umar till he died, and thereafter with Hafsa, the Prophet's wife. When Uthman sent for them, she refused to part with them, till he pledged that they would be returned to her. Then she gave them. Uthman transcribed them into the books, and returned the original to Hafsa withwhom they remained.”

Report n. 5

5. Hisham b. Urwah reports from his father, who said:

"When the participants of Yamamah were killed, Abu Bakr ordered Umar b. al-Khattab and Zaid b. Thabit: `Sit at the door of the Mosque, and when anyone brings something from the Qur'an which you suspect, write it down if it is witnessed by two men'. This is because those companions of the Prophet (‘s) who had compiled the Qur'an had been killed at Yamamah".

Report n. 6

6. Muhammad b. Sheen says:

"Umar got killed, without having compiled the Qur'an".

Report n. 7

7. Al-Hasan says:

"Once Umar b. al-Khattab inquired about a verse in the Qur'an. Someone said: "It was with so and so, but he was killed on the day of Yamamah".

Umar replied: "To Allah we belong!" Then he ordered the compilation of the Qur'an. So he was the first to compile it into a book form".

Report n. 8

8. Yahya b. Abdir Rehman b. Hatib says:

"Umar wished to compile the Qur'an, so he stood among the people and said: Anyone from you who had heard part of the Qur'an from the Messenger of Allah, should come to us with it'. They had written down parts of the Qur'an on pages, boards and palm-branches. Umar did not accept anything unless it was supported by two witnesses. He was killed while the compilation continued.

Then Uthman took over. He said: `Anyone who has someth­ing of the Qur'an with him should bring to us'. And he never accepted anything without having two witnesses. Then Khuzaimah b. Thabit came to him and said: "I find that you have left out two verses which you have not recorded". They asked: "Which are they"? He said: "I have received from the Messenger of Allah (peacebe upon him and his progeny):

لقد جاءكم رسول من انفسكم عزيز عليهما عنتم

till the end of the Surah. So Uthman said: "And I bear witness that these two verses are from Allah. Now, tell us where do you want us to place them?" Khuzaimah said: "Place them at the end of what was last revealed of the Qur'an". So Baraah was ended with them".

Report n. 9

9. Ubaid b. Umair said:

"Umar never recorded any verse in the compilation till it was witnessed by two men. Then a man from Ansar brought to him these two verses:

لقد جاءكم رسول من انفسكم عزيز عليه ماعنتم

till its end. Umar said: I shall never ask you to substantiate these. The Messenger of Allah was indeed like that'.3

Report n. 10

10. Sulaiman b. Arqam reports from Al-Hasan and Ibn Sirin and Ibn Shihab Az-Zuhri. They said:

"In the battle of Yamamah, massacre spread among reciters of the Qur'an, killing four hundred men. Then Zaid b. Thabit met Umar b. al-Khattab and told him: `This Qur'an binds us to our faith. If Qur'an vanishes, our faith vanishes also. I have decided to compile the Qur'an in a book form'. Umar asked him to withhold till he had consulted Abu Bakr. They went to Abu Bakr and informed him about the intention. He said: `Do not make haste. Wait till I have consulted the Muslims'. Then he stood to address the people and informed them about the intention. They said: "You have made the right decision". So they compiled the Qur'an. Then Abu Bakr ordered a herald to announce among people: "Whoever has any part of the Qur'an with him should come up with it".

Report n. 11

11. Khuzaimah b. Thabit reports:

"I brought the following ayah to Umar b. al-Khattab and Zaid b. Thabit:

لقد جاءكم رسول من انفسكم

Zaid asked: "Who bears witness with you?" I said: "No. I do not know anyone". So Umar said: "I bear witness with him for the ayah".

Report n. 12

12. Abu Ishaq reports from some of his friends. They said:

"When Umar had completed the collection of the Qur'an, he inquired: "Who is most well versed in Arabic?" They said: "Saeed b. al-Aas". Then he asked: "Who is most proficient writer?" They said: "Zaid b. Thabit". He said: "Then Saeed should dictate and Zaid should write down". So they transcribed four copies of the Qur'an. A copy each was sent to Kufah, Basrah, Syria and Hijaz".

Report n. 13

13. Abdullah b. Fadhalah says:

"When Umar decided to write down the master copy of the Qur'an, he appointed a group of his companions for it and they said: "When you have any disagreement over the language.write it down in the dialect of Mudhar.Because Qur'an came down to a man from the family of Mudhar".

Report n. 14

14. And Abu Qalabah said:

"In the days of Uthman's caliphate, a tutor would teach recitation according to a particular person, while another would teach recitation according to another person; so when the boys (students) met, they disagreed about each other's recitations. This finally came to the attention of the tutors who labelled each other's recitations as profane.

When Uthman learnt about this, he stood up to address the people and said:

"If you who are near me have so much of disagreements and confusion, then those who are farther away must have worse differences and errors. So, O Companions of Muhammad, join hands to write down a master copy of the Qur'an".

Abu Qalabah says:

Malik b. Anas told me: (According to Abu Bakr b. abi Dawud this Malik b. Anas is the grandfather of the known Malik b. Anas) "I was among those to whom the copy was dictated. So whenever there was any disagreement about an ayah, they would try to remember somebody who had heard it from the Messenger of Allah (peacebe upon him and his progeny). And if he was away, or lived in the deserts, they would write the preceding and the following words, leaving the disputed part till the person they wanted to refer to appeared, orwas sent for. When the copy was finally ready, Uthman wrote to all the towns saying: "I have done this way, and have struck off what I had, so you strike off what you have"

Report n. 15

15. Masa'b b. Sa'ad reported:

"Uthman stood to address the people and said: 'O people, you are only thirteen years away from the era of the Prophet (‘s) and have already begun to dispute about the Qur'an. Some of you talk of the recitation by Ubayy, while others quote the recitation by Abdullah. And one tells the other that his recitation has no value. So I command everyone who has any part of the Qur'an with him to come up with it'. Then people started coming with the Qur'an written on pieces of papers and patches of skin, till most of it was compiled. Then Uthman called them individually, imploring each of them to confirm that he had heard the Prophet (‘s) recite for him, and each confirmed. When it was over, Uthman said: "Who is the best scribe?" They said: "The scribe of the Prophet (‘s), Zaid b. Thabit". He said: "Who is most proficient in Arabic?" They said; "Saeed b. al-Aas". Uthman said: "Then Saeed should dictate and Zaid should write". So Zaid started writing and made out several copies which were distributed among men. Then I heard a companion of Muhammad say: "He has done well".

Report n. 16

16. Abul Malih says:

"When Uthman decided to have the Qur'an copied, he said: "People of Huzail would dictate and people of Thaqif would write".

Report n. 17

17. Abdul A'la b. Abdillah b. Abdillah b. Amir al Qarshi says:

"When he had completed the work of compilation, Uthman came up with it, and looking in it said: `I see some minor errors which Arabs will mend on their tongues"'.

Report n. 18

18. Ikramah said:

"When the transcribed Qur'an was brought before Uthman, he saw some minor error. So he said: "Had it been dictated by someone from Huzail and written by one from Thaqif, this error would not have occurred.

Report n. 19

19. Ata says:

"When Uthman compiled the Qur'an, he sent for Ubayy b. Ka'ab who dictated it to Zaid b. Thabit, Saeed b. al-Aas gave grammatical inflections. So this copy is according to the recitation by Ubayy and Zaid".

Report n. 20

20. Mujahid reported:

Uthman ordered Ubayy b. Ka'ab to dictate, Zaid b. Thabit to write down and Saeed b. al-Aas and Abdur-Rahman b. al-Harth to give grammatical inflections".

Report n. 21

21. Zaid b. Thabit said:

"When we transcribed the Qur'an, I found that an ayah which I had been hearing from the Prophet (‘s) was mis­sing, I found it with Khuzaima b. Thabit

من المؤمنين رجال صدقوا

up to

تبديلا

And two witnesses. Khuzaima was known as one equal to Prophet (‘s) had accepted his testimony as equal to two".

Report n. 22

22. Laith b.Sa'd said:

"The first person who collected Qur'an was Abu Bakr, and Zaid wrote it down. And people came to Zaid b. Thabit, but he would not write down any ayah except when supported by two witnesses. The ending part of Bara’ah was not found except with Abu Khuzaimah b. Thabit. He said: "Write it down, because the Messenger of Allah (‘s) had accepted his witness as equal to two witnesses". So it was written. And when Umar came up with the ayah of Rajm (i.e. stoning the adult­erer or adulteress to death) it was not recorded because he was alone".4

These are the important traditions reported on the subject of compilation of the Qur'an. Apart from being isolated reports which give no benefit of certitude, they have various def­iciencies.

Notes

1. Sahih, Bukhari,bab jamul Qur’an, v6, p.98

2. Sahih, Bukhari,bab jamul Qur’an, v6, p.99, note, these two reports, and the following ones till No. 11 are mentioned in Muntakhab of Kanz al Ummal, on the margin of Ahmad Hanbal's Musnad, v2, p. 43-52.

3. This tradition in Muntakhab of Kanzul Ummal has been repor­ted by Yahya b. Ju'dah.

4. al Itqan, v1, p.101

The Contradictions

These reports are self-contradictory on many points, making them totally unreliable. Here, in the form of questions and answers, we examine the contradictions.

When was the Qur'an compiled as a book?

The second report says it was compiled during the rule of Uthman. The first, third, fourth and some of the later reports explain that it was in the era of Abu Bakr. And the seventh and twelfth report indicate that it was during Umar's caliphate.

Who undertook to compile the Qur'an during the era of Abu Bakr?

The first two traditions and the twenty second say that it was Zaid b. Thabit, but the fourth report says it was Abu Bakr himself; and that he only asked Zaid to go through what he himself had collected. And the fifthreport together with the others indicate that the task was undertaken by Umar and Zaid.

Was Zaid given sole authority to compile the Qur'an?

The first tradition clearly states that Abu Bakr gave him sole authority. He told Zaid: "You are a young, intelligent man, and we find no fault in you. You were also a scribe, writing down the revelations for the Messenger of Allah (‘s). So attend to the Qur'an and compile it". These words are explicit. But the fifth and other traditions reveal that the writing was substantia­ted by two witnesses, so much so that when Umar came with the verse of rajm, it was rejected.

Were there some verses which remained unrecorded till the time of Uthman?

Most of the traditions say that no verses remained unrecor­ded, but the second report says that some of the verses re­mained unwritten.

Did Uthman omit any thing from what was compiled before him?

Most of the traditions quoted above say that he did not exclude or omit anything. But the fourteenth report tells us that he struck off some parts from the previous compilation, and ordered the Muslim to do the same.

From what sources did Uthman prepare a book copy of the Qur'an?

The second and fourth report say: he relied upon the notes and pages collected by Abu Bakr. Then the eighth, fourteenth and fifteenth traditions reveal that he relied upon two witnesses, and upon those who claimed to have heard the ayah from the Prophet (‘s).

Who asked Abu Bakr to compile the Qur'an?

The first report says that Umar did it, and that Abu Bakr conceded after having first refused. Then he sent for Zaid who also conceded after having declined. But the tenth report tells us that Zaid and Umar jointly asked Abu Bakr to undertake the work, and he conceded after having consulted the Muslims.

Who prepared the master copy and sent its editions to various cities?

The second report says it was Uthman, while the twelfth tells us it was Umar.

When were the two verses added to the Surah of Bara’ah?

The first, eleventh and twenty second reports reveal that this happened during the time of Abu Bakr, and the eighth report together with others say that it happened in the era of Umar.

Who came up with those two verses?

The first and twenty second reports say they were brought in by Abu Khuzaimah, while the eighth and eleventh reports say it was Khuzaimah. These are two gentlemen who had no relation­ship with each other at all, as reported by Ibn Abd al Barr.1

How were they accepted as being parts of the Qur'an?

By a sole witness, as mentioned in the first, ninth and twenty second report.By the accompanying witness by Uthman, as shown in the eighth; and by the supporting witness by Umar as shown in the eleventh.

Who did Uthman appoint for dictating and writing of the Qur'an?

(i) Uthman appointed Zaid, Ibnaz Zubair, Saeed and Abdu Rahman as writers (see Report n. 2)

(ii) He appointed Zaid forwriting, and Saeed for dictating, (see Report n. 15)

(iii) He appointed a person from Thaqif to write down, and a person from Huzad to dictate; (see Report n. 16)

(iv) The writer was not from Thaqif and the one who dictated was not from Huzad. (see Report n. 18)

(v) The dictation was by Ubay b. Kaab, and Saeed gave grammatical inflections to what Zaid wrote down (see Report n. 19)

(vi) The twenty second report adds the name of Abd ar Rahman together with Saeed.

Note

1. Tafsir, al Qurtubi, v1, p.56

Their Conflict with Other Traditions Related to the Compilation of the Qur’an

These traditions are in conflict with all those tradition which stress that the Qur'an was recorded and compiled during the time of the Prophet (‘s) himself. It has been reported bya group which include : Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ahmed b. Hanbal, Tirmidhi, Nas’ai, Ibn Haban, al-Hakim, al-Bayhaqi, Ziya al Maqdasi, who report from Ibn Abbas as following:

"I asked Uthman b. Affan: 'Why have you joined al-Anfal with Baraah, excluding the line of Bismillah from between them, while the former is shorter than 100 verses, and the later exceeds a hundred, and then you placed them among the seven long Surahs? What made you do that?"

Uthman said:

"At times, the Prophet (‘s) used to come up with the revelation of Surahs containing numerous verses, then when revelation came in small parts, he used to call his scribe and say: "Place this part among the Surah which says so and so": and when verses were revealed, he instructed: "Place these among the Surah which mentions such and such thing". Al-Anfal was from among the early revelations at Madina, and Bara’ah was from what was revealed last.-Their contents were similar, so I presumed that they belonged to each other. The Prophet (‘s) never clarified this in his lifetime, so I joined them, without Basmalah in between and placed them among the seven long Surahs".1

Tabranireports, and so does Ibn Asakir from Asha'bi.

"The Qur'an was compiled in the days of the Prophet (‘s) by six men from the Ansar. They were Ubay b. Ka'ab, Zaid b. Thabit, Muadh b. Jabal, Abu al-Darda',Sa'd b. Ubaid, and Abu Zaid. And Ibn Jariyah had taken it except two or three Surah".2

And Qataadah says:

"I asked Anas b. Malik: `Who collected the Qur'an at the time of the Prophet (‘s)?' He said: `Four of them, all from Ansar. They were Ubay b. Ka'b, Muadh b. Jabal, Zaid b. Thabit and Abu Zaid'.3

Masruq, when recalling Abdullah b. Umar and Abdullah b. Masud said:

"I have always loved him. I heard the Prophet (‘s) say: Take the Qur'an from four: from Abdullah b. Masood, Salim, Muadh and Ubay b. Ka'b".4

Nasai has a report based on authentic chain from Abdullah b. Umar who said:

"I gathered the Qur'an, and read it every night. The Prophet heard about it, so he said: "Read it in a month ..."5

We will mention the compilation of the Qur'an by Umm Waraqah later.

One might argue that the collection or compilation mentioned in these reports denote committing the Qur'an to memory, and not to the papers. This presumption cannot be corroborated. Besides, it is a known fact that there were numerous believers at the time of the Prophet (‘s) who knew the Qur'an by heart, so how can the memorising of the Qur'an be confined to four or six names? Those who have studied carefully the lives of the companions of the Prophet (‘s) would know it for certain that the Qur'an was ready compiled during the days of the Prophet (‘s) and that the number of its compilers were too many to be ignored.

The report by al-Bukhari through Anas stating that when the Prophet (‘s) died, the Qur'an had not been compiled by anyone except four: Abu al Darda, Muadh b. Jabal, Zaid b. Thabit and Abu Zaid, is a report which ought to be discarded and rejected because it contradicts not only the earlier reports, but also what al-Bukhari himself reported. Moreover, the report cannot be accepted because it is difficult to conceive that the reporter knew all the Muslims at the time of the death of the Prophet (‘s), and that in spite of the great number of the Muslims, scattered all around, he was able to find only four who had collected the Qur'an. This is a mere conjecture.

To summarize the whole situation, one may ask:

(a) With all the foregoing reports, how can one believe that Abu Bakr was the first to compile the Qur'an, after he had become a Caliph?

(b) And if we accept the report, it is strange that Abu Bakr should ask Zaid and Umar to collect the Qur'an from leather parchments, pieces of papers and from the people's memory, while Abdullah, Muadh and Ubayy were present alive among the people, especially when the Prophet (‘s) had himself recom­mended that the Qur'an be taken from them?

(c) Of course, they could not have anything from Salim because he was one of those killed at the battle of Yamamah. But Zaid, one of the compilers of the Qur'an, was there, and Abu Bakr had certified his character as young, intelligent and without blemish. So what was the need of resorting to others?

(d) Finally, the widely acknowledged and authentic tradition about thaqalayn leaves us with no doubt that the Qur'an existed in a complete book form. We shall point this out later.

Notes

1. Muntakhab Kanz al Ummal, v2, p.48

2. Muntakhab Kanz al Ummal, v2, p.48

3. Sahih, Bukhari,chapter : "Qura" from the Prophet's companions, v6, p.202

4. Sahih, Bukhari,chapter : "Qura" from the Prophet's companions, v6, p.202

5. al Itqan, v1, p.124

Their Conflict with the Qur’an itself

These reports contradict the Qur'an itself. Numerous verses of the Qur'an prove that complete Surahs existed, each dis­tinguished from the other. They were in the hands of the people, even those who were idolaters or the people of the Books. The famous challenge by the Prophet (‘s) to the disbelievers was to produce the like of the Qur'an, the like of ten Surahs or even one Surah. This means that the Surah were there in the public hands.

And in the Qur'an itself, the word "book" has been used in many verses. And also in the famous saying of the Prophet (‘s): "I leave among you two valuable things, the book of Allah and my progeny", there is a clear proof that the Qur'an was then written and compiled, because the word `book' is not used for that which is retained in the memory, nor for scattered writings on the parchments, pieces of papers and bones, except metaphorically. It is not right to construe any word metaphoric­ally unless there isan evidence in its context.

The word `book' denotes existence of a collection and not of scattered scribbles, nor of things which are in the memory but not written.


3

4