Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

A Study of Sunni and Shii Traditions Concerning Tahrif [of Holy Quran] Part 2

In this text, a three-part series written by Rasul Ja'fariyan, the author analyzes traditions from Sunni and Shia sources regarding Tahrif (alterations) [of Holy Quran], also from semantic and textual point of view. Evidences for the absence of Tahrif are presented via historical events and traditions.

Authors(s): Rasul Ja'fariyan

Translator(s): Mujahid Husayn

Table of Contents

A Study of Sunni and Shii Traditions Concerning Tahrif Part 2  3

The Collection of the Qur'an and Tahrif 3

Tahrif and Shii Traditions 7

Endnotes 17

A Study of Sunni and Shii Traditions Concerning Tahrif Part 2

The Collection of the Qur'an and Tahrif

Throughout the course of history, the Muslims' stand concern­ing the Qur'an is characterized by the absence of doubt, regard­ing any of the verses and their belief that it is in totally a revela­tion of God Almighty which has remained secure from deletions and additions.

Despite this belief, some traditions narrated by the Ahl al-Sunnah in the Sihah and other books on tradition concerning the compilation of the Qur'an appear to indicate the absence of tawatur of Quelinic verses and claim their basis on khabar al-wahid.1 Here we shall men­tion some of these traditions and later examine them critically. The following tradition is narrated by al-Bukhari:

Zayd ibn Thabit narrates: "Abu Bakr called me after the battle of Yamamah. Umar lbn al-Khattab was then also with him and Abu Bakr said to me:' Umar had come to me and said: "The battle of Yamamah has taken a heavy toll of the reciters of the Qur'in, and I fear that fighting in other places would similarly result in a loss of reciters. This would lead to the loss of many Quranic verses. I think it is advisable that you should order the Qur'an to be collected."

I said to Umar: "How can we do something which the Prophet (S) did not?" Umar replied: "It is, by God, a good thing," and he continued to remind me of it until God opened my breast to the matter, and I appreci­ated the advice of Umar: " Zayd said: "Abu Bakr said to me: 'you are an intelligent young man, and I consider you free from any kind of blame, for you have also written the Revelation for the Prophet. Search for the Qur'an and collect it.'

I said, 'By God, if they had ordered me to move a mountain it would not have been more difficult than what I have been asked to do concerning the collection of the Qur'an.' Then I said to him: 'How will you do something which the Prophet (S) did not do.' He replied: 'It is, by God, a good thing.' Then Abu Bakr continued to remind me till God opened my heart to that to which He had opened the breasts of Abu Bakr and `Umar.

Then I searched for the Quran and collected it from palm leaves, stone tablets and the people's memories. I found the concluding part of the Surat al­Tawbah, from لقد جاءكم رسول.. until the end of al-Baraah, with no one except Abu Khuzaymah al-'Ansari. These suhuf were with Abu Bakr till his death, then with `Umar as long as he was alive, and then with his daughter Hafsah."2

Ibn Abi Dawad reports the following tradition transmitted through a hasan chain:

`Umar enquired about a certain Quranic verse and he was told that it was with a person killed in the battle of Yamamah. Thereupon he said "Inna lillah," and ordered the collection of the Qur'an. Thus he was the first one to compile it in form of a mushaf (codex).3

Ibn Ashtah in al-Masahif, narrates the following from Ibn Buraydah:

Ibn Buraydah said: "The first person to collect the Qur'an in the form of a mushaf was Salim, the mawla of Hudhayfah. He had taken an oath not to put on his cloak (i.e. to leave his home) until he had collected the Qur'an. Then they consulted as to what they would call it, and some of them suggested that it be named 'al-sifr.' Salim observed that this name was given by the Jews, (to their scripture), and therefore they did not favour it. Then he said: 'I have seen the like of it being called `mushaf in Abyssinia.' Thereupon they concur­red on naming it al-mushaf4

Al-Bukhari also reports the following tradition, which has also been recorded by al-Tirmidhi:

Zayd ibn Thabit said: "When we wrote the masahif and I missed a verse I used to hear from the Prophet (S). I found it later with Abu. Khuzayrnah al­'Ansari: من المؤمنين رجال صدقوا... (33:23). `Umar did not use to accept a verse of the Book of God unless two men gave evidence of its being so. A man belong­ing- to the Ansar came with two verses and `Umar said to him: 'I will not demand apart from yourself another witness for it.' "5

Yahya ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman Hatib observes: " `Umar decided to collect the Qur'an and standing up among the people he said: 'Anyone who has received anything of the Qur'an from the Prophet (S) should bring it to us.' They had written it on paper, stone tablets and palm leaves, and nothing used to be accepted from them unless two witnesses gave evidence to this effect. Then Khuzaymah came and said: 'I see that you have not included two verses and not written them.' Umar enquired: 'What are those two?' He replied: 'I have received from the Prophet (S): لقد جاءكم رسول.. (9:128):6

Anas ibn Malik said: "I was one of those who were being dictated the Qur'an. At times when they differed regarding a verse, they would recall someone who had heard it from the Prophet (S). At times that person would be absent or in some remote place. Thereupon, they would write the verses preceding and following that verse and leave a vacant place for it until that person returned or was sent for."7

It is narrated from Ubayy ibn Kaab that: "They collected the Qur'an in masahif during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, may God have mercy on him. Men used to write on being dictated by Ubayy, and when they reached the verse of the Surat al-Baraah, ثم انصرفوا صرف الله.. (9:127) they thought that it was the last verse of the Qur'an to be revealed. Thereupon Ubayy ibn Ka`b said: 'After this, two more verses have been read to me: لقد جاءكم رسول "8

Abü Dawud ibn al-Zubayr narrates that Abu Bakr said to `Umar and Zayd: "Sit at the door of the mosque and whoever comes to you with two witnesses evidencing anything from the Book of Allah, write it "9

Ibn Sirin reports that both Abu Bakr and `Umar died without the Qur'an having been collected)10 . Ibn Sa`d reports that `Umar was the first person to collect the Qur'an11

Similar traditions are present in a large number in the Sihah and other works, and to accept what they say about the Qur'an implies negating the tawatur of the Qur'an and accepting it as based on akhbar ahad, such as the

story about incorporation of verses on the sole authority of Khuzaymah, or on the evidencing of two witnesses, or on the narration of Ubayy ibn Ka`b, or on the word of a person who happened to be out in the desert and who had to be called to recite to them. Some traditions - like the one about a verse which was with a qari martyred in Yamamah - cast doubt on the completeness of the Qur'an. Apart from this, other questionable issues crop up which a person cannot disregard were he to accept the traditions of the Sihah in this regard.

Al-Zarkashi was aware of this, and he has mentioned an alternative interpretation in this regard which cannot possibly be accepted. He says regarding the observation of Zayd concerning the acceptance of two verses from Khuzaymah:

It does not imply that a Quranic text has been proved by khabar al-wahid because Zayd, and similarly the other Companions, had assuredly heard it and knew its place in the .Suat al-'Ahzab on the basis of the Prophet's instruc­tion. Then Zayd had forgotten it, and on having heard it again recollected it. His seeking the verses from other people was only a means for recollecting and not for getting new knowledge12

But there is no proof to justify this kind of interpretation, because even if we accept it the question remains whether tawatur stands on the knowledge of only Zayd and Khuzaymah? Did all the other Companions forget this verse? If this was so, couldn't all of them including Khuzaymah forget some verses without there being anyone to remind and help them to recollect?

A stranger interpretation of his concerns the last verses of Surat al­ Tawbah about which Zayd is reported to have said that he had found them with none except Khuzaymah ibn Thabit. Here AlZarkashi says: "It implies, (none) from those among Zayd's tabaqah (generation) who had not collected the Qur'an.,13 This interpretation has no basis at all.

Others have also tried to rectify the problem posed by the story of Khuzaymah by construing it to mean that the Sababah did not find that verse in a written form with anyone except Khuzaymah.14 The mention of its being written is not found in any tradition relating to this matter and it is not possible to accept it without any evidence. Apart from this, the condition of Khuzaymah's testimony being considered equal to the evidence of two witnesses negates this supposition.

Simi­larly, the interpretation offered by others that it means that Zayd sought to confirm that verse from someone who had heard it directly from the Prophet (S),15 is again without any basis. The interpretation of Ibn Hajar about the story of recording verses is incorrect regarding the meaning of `shahidayn' (two witnesses) because he does not rely on any proof and the literal meaning of the word shahidayn also negates his interpretation.'16

It appears that the main purpose of such traditions is to give credit to the so-called compilers or those who ordered the alleged compilation and collection. But the acceptance of such traditions results in a denial of the tawattur of the Qur'anic text, in addition to laying blame on the Holy Prophet (S) who is implicitly held responsible for neglecting a most momentous duty in regard to the collection and ordering of the Quranic text.

We, however, think that these traditions ought to be rejected on the following grounds:

There is contradiction among the different traditions and it is not possible to reconcile them. It is not known whether the collector was Abu Bakr or `Umar or Salim, the mawla of Hudhayfah or, as Ibn Sirin observes, someone else.

It is said that the reason behind the collection of the Qur'an was the martyrdom of reciters (qurra) at Yamamah. This is not accept­able because the scribes of the revelation (kuttab) and those who had memorized it (huffaz), such as 'Ali ibn Abi Talib, Ubayy ibn Kaab (about whom the Prophet (S) had said: "Ubayy ibn Kaab is the best reciter among them"),17 and similarly `Abd Allah ibn Mas`ud (about whom the Prophet (S) had said: "Read the Qur'an the way it is read by Ibn Umum `Abd)18 were all present in Madinah. In the presence of these persons in Madinah, the alleged fears of Abu Bakr and `Umar con­cerning the loss of the Qur'an cannot be admitted.

We have already established in the preceding pages that the Qur'an had been collected during the lifetime of the Prophet (S). Hence the stories of its being collected during the reign of the Caliphs are untrue and cast aspersion on the Prophet (S) by alleging that he neglected its collection, considering that there was no more important task for him than the compilation of the Qur'an and its preservation for the future generations of Muslims. Therefore, when it is confirmed that the Qur'an was collected during the lifetime of the Prophet (S), these traditions cannot be accepted.

After accepting the presence of tawatur concerning all the verses of the Qur'an and the absence of deletions from it and additions to it, as per consensus, it becomes necessary to discard these traditions which entail the Quran's basis on akhbar ahad.

Tahrif and Shii Traditions

Shi'i narrators have also narrated traditions which apparently entail the presence of tahrif in the Book of God. Some people who have a shallow understanding of these issues have used these traditions to accuse that the Shiah believe in tahrif. The following may be said in answer to such accusations:

Inauthenticity of the Traditions Alleging Tahrif: The narration and mention of such traditions in books does not imply a tacit acceptance of their authenticity, especially by the majority of the Imamiyyah. The position of the Ahl al-Sunnah is the same regarding such traditions in their works, although they believe in the authenticity of all that has been narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari & Sahih Muslim and the other Sihah.

How is it possible to accept the authenticity of all that which has been mentioned in these books when we find in them contradictory traditions concerning many doctrinal and legal Islamic issues, is a question to which there is no credible answer? Even after the explicit claim of a particular traditionalist that he has recorded only authentic traditions, it is not possible to rely upon his word and consider all that he has narrated as authentic.

The Shi`ah do not believe in the authenticity of all traditions recorded in their books. Consequently, they mention the chain of narrators of traditions so that the researchers may be able to discern, after scrutinizing the character and reliability of narrators, between authentic and unreliable traditions. This principle applies to Al-Kafi and all other Shia works of tradition.

As to the Tafsir al-Qummi which has mentioned some of these traditions, what we have just said applies to this book as well. Apart from this, the Tafsir al-Qummi has been mixed up with another exegesis named Tafsir Abi Al-Jarud. Aqa Buzurg al-Tehrani has pointed out this fact in his al-Dhariah.19

This tafsir of Abu al-Jarud, apart from having in its chain of nar­rators Kathir ibn `Ayyash, who is unreliable, belongs to Abu al-Jitrad who had deviated from the path of the Ahl al-Bayt (A) and had been cursed by al-Imam al-Sadiq (A) (as mentioned by Ibn al-Nadim) who said about him and some others that they were liars. Traditions negat­ing his veracity and confirming his unreliability have been narrated from the Ahl al-Bayt (A).20

Al-Sayyid Al Khui’s tawthiq of Abu al-Jarud, due to his presence in the chains of the narrators of Kamil al-ziyarat, the veracity of whose chains of narrators has been testified by Muhammad ibn Qulawayh,21 is not correct, because the negation of his veracity precedes his establish­ment as a thiqah; the traditions condemning him were present before his being considered a thiqah by Ibn Qulawayh. Apart from this, his acceptance of the veracity of all the narrators of Kamil Al-Ziyarat is not correct, and the words of Ibn Qulawayh do not convey such a claim. Whatever the case may be, al-Mamaqani, after mentioning the traditions negating Abu al-Jarud's veracity, observes: "This person has in no way been considered a thiqah; rather he has strongly been condemned and considered unreliable in al-Waitzah and other books."'22

As to the fact that some thiqah narrators narrated from him, this does not necessitate his being considered thiqah, as expressly stated by al-Sayyid al-Khui’s concerning Abu al-Jarud.23

As to al-Kafi, which was compiled by al-Shaykh al-Kulayni - may God have mercy on him - during a span of twenty years, we do not accept the authenticity of all its traditions, because some of them are considered daif, mursal, etc., due to faults in their chains of transmis­sion. It also contains traditions which do not agree with the Qur'an and others which are defective from the viewpoint of text. Among such traditions are those which entail the occurrence of tahrif.

Al-Kulayni, moreover, has placed a number of such traditions under the head "al-nawadir," wherein he records nadir and shadhdh tradi­tions.'24

Thus al-Kafi, in the eyes of the Imamiyyah, is not like Sahih al­Bukhari and Sahih Muslim and other such compilations of traditions in the eyes of the Ahl al-Sunnah, who accept the authenticity of all the traditions contained in these books, even if they are opposed to the Qur'an, going to the extent of saying: السُنَّة قاضية على الكناب 'The Sunnah judges the Qur'an.25

If one refers to Mir 'at ul uqul(a commentary on al-Kafi) of al­`Allamah al-Majlisi, one will observe what al-Majlisi has mentioned about the traditions of al-Kafi concerning their chains of transmission, and will see that he has classed a large number of them as daif, mursal, or as possessing some other defect.

Al-Sayyid Hashim Maruf al-Husayni states: "The mutaqaddimun have not had any ijma on relying on all the traditions of al-Kafi.,26 He also says: "Al-Kafi contains 16199 traditions; among these 5072 are 144 hasan, 1128 muwaththaq, 302 qawi,, and 9480 daif."27 This break-up is based only on the basis of scrutiny concerning the chains of transmission, not that of the texts of the traditions.

It may be said that most of the traditions-entailing tahrif belong to the class of daif traditions whose chains terminate at weak narrators (du'afa)28 'and those who have been accused of ghuluww or professing deviate doctrines.

The greater part of these traditions have at their source Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari. Al-Shaykh Mirza Mehdi al-Burujerdi observes: "I have counted the traditions on tahrif and have found more than 188 of them terminating at al-Sayyari." We have also counted these tradi­tions and have found more than 300 of them coming from him.

Al-Shaykh al-Najashi in his book on rijal speaks about al-Sayyari: ضعيف الحديث، فاسد المذهب، و .A weak narrator of traditions, of devious beliefs. Al-Najashi's statement about him indicates that al-Sayyari had been accused of ghuluww.29 Al-Shaykh al-Tusi has also considered him daif in al-Istibsar after narrating a tradition from him.'30

Ibn Al-Ghadairi makes this statement about al-Sayyari: يُكَنَّى ابا عبيد الله المعروف بالسياري، ضعيف متهالك غال منحرف". 'His sobriquet - Abu Abadullah and popularly known as al-Sayyari; (is) za'if, weak, ghalli and deviate.'31

Al-Shaykh al-Tusi describes al-Sayyari as:

ضعيف الحديث، فاسد المذهب، مَجفُو الرواية كثير المراسيل 'A daif narrator, professing deviate doctrines, his traditions are not accepted, and most of his traditions are mursal32

Another of the narrators of these traditions is Yunus ibn Zabyan about whom al-Najashi remarks:ضعيف جدا، لا يلتفت الى ما رواه، كل كتبه تخليط ' Very daif; no attention is given to what he has narrated; all his books are confused and delirious.' Ibn al- Ghada'iri says of him: ابن ظبيان كوفي غال كذّاب وضَّاع الحديث Ibn Zabyan, a Kufi,a ghali,a liar,a fabricator of traditions.33

Mankhal ibn Jamil al-Kufi is also one of these narrators and writers on rijal have this to say about him: ضعيف فاسد الرواية! Daif and of corrupt narration,' and add: انه من الغلاة المنحرفين "He is one of the devious ghulat".34

Muhammad ibn Hasan ibn Jumhur is also among these narrators, and al-`Allamah al-Hilli says about him:

    كان ضعيفاً في الحديث، غاليا في المذهب، فاسداً في الرواية، لا يلتفت الى حديثه، ولا يُعتَمد على ما يرويه.

He was daif in narrating traditions, a ghali by faith, corrupt in his narrations; no significance is given to what he has narrated and it is not relied upon.35

Al-Najashi has the same to say about him: ضعيف الحديث، فاسد المذهب

A daif narrator and professor of deviate doctrines.36

From this it becomes clear that these narrators were not accept­able to the authorities on rijal, being considered by them as devious, ghulat, etc. The narration of their traditions by some Akhbari writers is due to their lack of precision and care, and unfortunately some writers have relied on the traditions of these weak narrators in their belief in the incompleteness of the Qur'an. But such writers are very few in number and as al-Shaykh Abu Zuhrah says: "A very large number of Imami scholars headed by al-Murtada, and others, oppose them."37

The late Ayatullah al-Sayyid al-Burijerdi states in this regard:

Logical necessity dictates against it (belief in tahrif), and the traditions contradicting the purity of the Quranic text are extremely unreliable, both from the viewpoint of sanad and content. Indeed some of these traditions contradict what is certain and necessary and go against the very purpose of Prophethood. Further, it is most amazing to see that some people claim the preservation of traditions in books and through oral transmission throughout a period exceeding thirteen centuries, contending that had any deletion taken place therein it would have been obvious, yet at the same time affirm the possibility of deletion taking place in the Quran.38

Al-Allamah al-Shahshahani observes regarding the traditions entailing tahrif: "These traditions deserve no attention on account of their amid. Even those who have argued on their basis have not regarded even one of them as

authentic (Sahih). They have been cast aside by the greatest of our scholars." He adds: "These traditions contradict reliable traditions, stronger than them in regard to their conformity with the Qur'an, the Sunnah, reason and consensus."39

Traditions Related to Variance of Readings: A part of the traditions narrated in this context are those which are related to the difference in qira'at; only some of them are mentioned in Shi’i books while a very large number of them, as said, are found in books of the Ahl al-Sunnah. Most of what has been reported in Shi’i books is attributed to the Ahl al-Bayt (A), especially to the mushaf of 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (A), while in the books of Ahl al-Sunnah such differences are attributed to such Sahabah as Ibn Mas`ud, Ubayy, and others.

We may say that these traditions, in which the verses have been mentioned in a form different from what is known through tawatur and is popular among the people, are all alehbor cihdd and consequently incapable of establishing anything as Quranic text. Further, it is also not possible to forsake something mutawatir by relying on akhbar ahad. Accordingly, the Imams (A) have ordered their followers to recite the Qur'an as it is recited by the people.40

Dr. `Abd al-Sabar Shahin observes: "All that which has been nar­rated concerning differences of qira 'at, which delete from or add to the Qur'an as we possess it, is undoubtedly of a shahdadh character and incapable of proving something as part of the Qur'an, or is of mudraj character in which commentary or explanation has found way into the text without being part of the Quranic text."41

Accordingly, it is not valid to follow these shahaddh forms of qiraat of the Qur'an, because they are based on akhbar ahad, in addi­tion to the possibility of these readings being explanations of the Quranic text and exegetic comments, as pointed out by Dr. `Abd al­ Sabur. This is further supported by Abu Hayyan's statement in his footnotes (taliqah) on the reading of Ibn Masud: فوَسوَس له الشيطان in place of فأزَّلهما الشيطان عنها "This reading is contrary to the Quranic text as accepted by consensus and it is appropriate to consider it an exegetic remark.'42

The same applies to such traditions as have been narrated by the Imamiyyah. The books of the Ahl al-Sunnah also contain traditions regarding differences of readings and there are scores of books written on the topic. One may refer in this context to al-Masahif of Ibn Abi Dawud al-Sijistani, the exegeses of al-Zamakhshari, al­-Tabari and others, and one would be surprised by what he finds)43

Most of these variations pertain to exegetic and explanatory remarks, especially of those who accepted the validity of changing the words of the Qur'an for clarification,'44 though with the passage of time it led to lending support to claims of tahrif.

As to the tradition narrated by the Ahl al-Sunnah that the Qur'an has been revealed in seven different 'letters' ('ala sab`at ahruf,45 which was interpreted to imply the validity of the various readings of the Qur'an), it is something which cannot be accepted, neither on the basis of traditions nor logic. This is

because this tradition is contradicted by another tradition narrated by them which regards the Qur'an as revealed in three ahruf ( ala thalathat ahruf).46 Similarly, it is also opposed to what has been authentically narrated by the Imamiyyah from al-Imam al-Sadiq (A), who while answering the query of Fudayl ibn Yasar regarding the narration that the Qur'an has been revealed in seven ahruf, said:

    كَذَبوا- أعداء الله- لكنه نَزلَ على حرفِ واحد من عند الواحد

They lie, the enemies of God! Rather, it has been revealed in a single harf by the One.47

The following tradition has been narrated from al-Imam al-Baqir (A):

    إن القرآن واحد، نزل من عن الواحد، ولكن الاختلاف يجيء من قبل الرواة.

Verily, there is only one Qur'an, which has been revealed by the One, and the differences have cropped up due to the narrators.48

Al-Shaykh al-Tusi states in this regard: "It should be noted that the common view of our scholars and their position, well known from their accounts and narrations, is that the Qur'an was sent down on one harf and on one prophet."49

The idea of sab`at ahruf implying seven permissible readings, is also negated by the Imami tradition that the meaning of sab`at ahruf is seven rhetorical forms, which are amr (positive command), zajr (pro­hibitory command), targhib (inducement), tarhib (warning), jadal (polemics, argument), mat hal (allegory, parable), and qasas (story telling).50

It has been narrated by the Ahl al-Sunnah from Ibn Mas'ud that the Qur'an has been revealed on khamsat ahruf: halal, haram, muhkam, mutashabih , and amthal.51 It has also been narrated from 'Ali (A) that the Qur'an has been revealed in four parts: a quarter concerning halal, a quarter concerning haram , a quarter concerning ethical dis­courses (mawaiz) and parables (mathal), and a quarter dealing with historical narratives and accounts (qasas wa athar).52 many similar traditions have been narrated by the Ahl al-Sunnah.53

Those among the Imamiyyah who have narrated that the Qur'an has been revealed on seven ahruf are either those whose identity is unknown (majhal),54 or those who are accused of ghuluww and doctrinal deviation,55 or those who have meant by it something apart from the validity of the different readings.

We also find traditions which negate the existence of different readings, such as the tradition recorded by Atimad in his Musnad from Zirr ibn Hubaysh, from Ibn Masud

    أقرأني رسول الله سورة الاحقاف فخرجت الى المسجد فإذا رجل يقرأها على غيرما أقرأني، فقلت، من أقرأك؟ فقال رسول الله. قال: قلت للآخر إقرأها، فقرأها على غير قرآتي وقراءة صاحبي، فانطلقت بهما الى النبي (ص) فقلت: يا رسول الله هذات يخالفاني في القرآءة فغضب وتعَمَّرَ وجهه وقال (ص)/ إنما أهلك من كان قبلكم الاختلاف، قال زِرٌ: وعنده

(ص) قال: فقال: ان رسول الله يأمركم أن يقرأ كل رجل كما اُقريء، فإنما أَهلَكَ من كان قبلكم الاختلاف.

The Prophet (S) taught the reading of the Surat al-'Ahqaf to me. When I went to the mosque there I found a person reciting this surah differently. I asked him, "Who taught you this reading?" He replied, 'The Prophet (S)." Then I asked another person to recite it and he recited it in a manner which differed from that of me and that of my companion. Then I went with both of them to the Prophet (S) and said, "Both of them differ from me in their reading."

The Prophet's (S) face became red with anger and he said, "Surely it was this difference which caused those who have gone before you to perish."

Zirr ibn Hubaysh says, “Ibn Masud proclaimed in the presence of the Prophet (S), The Prophet (S) orders that each one of you should recite the Qur'an as it has been recited to him. For, surely, it is such difference which has caused those before you to perish.”56

This tradition expressly shows that the Prophet (S) prohibited differences in reading and would be dismayed on coming across such variance. It also highlights that the differences did not originate from the Prophet (S); rather, it shows the Prophet (S) as emphasizing that such variance caused the earlier nations to perish and that it should not be present among Muslims.

The differences of reading between some Sahabah during the Prophet's (S) time were due to the differences between their dialect and that of the Prophet's (S) and his tribe, or these differences came into being after the Prophet (S), especially after the spreading of the Com­panions to different places and their reciting the Qur'an to the people, each with his own peculiar rendering of certain verses of the Qur'an. The presence of this variance was a cause of anxiety for some Compan­ions and they urged `Uthman to gather the people on the single reading which was received in a mutawatir fashion from the Prophet (S). This is apparent from the following traditions about Uthman's step:

Anas says: "Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman came to `Uthman at a time when the people of Syria and Iraq were fighting together in the conquest of Armenia and Azarbaijan. Hudhayfah was worried about their differences of reading, and he said to `Uthman: "O Commander of the Faithful, save this ummah before it starts differing about the Qur'an, like the Jews and the Christians...." `Uthman consequently ordered the collection of the masahif (which were in the hands of the people)."57

Hudhayfah says: "I was fighting in the conquest of Armenia in which both the people of Iraq and Syria took part. The Syrians would recite in accordance with the reading of Ubayy ibn Ka`b. They would recite in a way which the Iraqis had not heard, and the Iraqis would accuse them of apostasy. The Iraqis would recite in accordance with the reading of Ibn Mas'ud. When they recited in a fashion which the Syrians had not heard, they would accuse the Iraqis of apostasy." Zayd said: " `Uthman ordered me to collect the Qur'an."58

This is also supported by the following episode reported by Al ­Baladhuri:

They said to `Uthman, "You have burnt the Book of God." `Uthman replied, "The people differed in their readings of the Qur'an, and one would say to another, 'My Qur'an is better than your Qur'an,' and the other one would claim, 'My Qur'an is better than yours.' Hudhayfah was the first to dis­approve of it and he brought up the matter before me. I gathered the people on the reading which was written in the Prophet's presence." They said, "But why did you burn the masahif? Weren't their contents in accordance with the reading on which you have brought together the people? Why didn't you allow them to remain as they were?" He replied, "I wanted that nothing should remain except that which had been written in the Prophet's presence and recorded in a mushaf that was with Hafsah, the Prophet's wife. I pray to God to forgive me."59

Now when the variance of readings could lead to accusations of tahrif, the like of which had occurred among the Jews and Christians, is it logical to believe that the Prophet (S) permitted it? The observation of al-Tabari is strange where he says: "The Prophet's (S) command regarding the reciting of the Qur'an in seven ahruf (something in accord­ance with which `Uthman did not act, but on the contrary made the people accept a single reading) was a command indicating permissibility and incumbence.”60

Neither can the tradition (about sab`at ahruf) be interpreted to imply - as interpreted by Dr. `Abd al-.Sabur - the differing dialects and accents, which were the result of differences of language and educa­tion, nor can it imply the difference of some words and a change in the sequence of sentences where the meanings remain unaffected, because it obviously amounts to accepting tahrif, which angered the Prophet (S), was a cause of consternation for Hudhayfah, and as a measure against which `Uthman took his step, which was approved by 'Ali (A) who said: "Had I been in power, I would have done what he has done."61

It is necessary to point out that if the tradition regarding the Qur'an being revealed in sab`at ahruf had been authentic, the Companions would surely have argued on its basis and criticized Uthman's action, because he had approved only a single reading. In this regard, it is the opinion of my revered teacher al-`Allamah al-Sayyid al-Murtada that the reasons for the variant readings were: the absence of diacritical marks and points, variations of the scripts used by the scribes of the Qur'an, errors and slips made by the copyists, the exercise of personal judge­ment in regard to reciting, the shortcomings in reciting, mistakes in hearing, differences of dialect, and, sometimes, the inclusion of exe­getical remarks while reciting the text.62

For instance, the verse is ان الله يغفر الذنوب جميعا was recited with the addition ولا يبالي (and He will not care). Such examples are present in large numbers. Similarly, some differences of reading were the result of the belief held by some that the words of the Qur'an can be substituted by their synonyms.63

This fact is evident to anyone conversant with Qur'anic studies. There­fore, one who refers to books written on the variant readings will find that the basis of these different readings is individual ijtihad practised by their propounders in the areas of grammar and syntax. This kind of ijtihad ,

apart from being based on shadhdh and weak traditions, is only a later development, not seen in the earlier period. This form of ijtihad stands condemned on the ground that it is in fact ijtihad in opposition to a nag.

The Shiah concur that it is not valid to recite these shadhdh forms of readings during salat, and this indicates that they do not attach any weight to the traditions on which these readings are based.

Al-Sayyid al-Tabatabai says in this regard: "The basis of authority (in regard to a Qur'anic verse) is the tawatur of its text and reading." He adds: "Shadhdh traditions are not worthy of notice." Al-Mawla al­Mazandarani observes: "That which has reached us through akhbar ahad - such as the shadhdh forms of readings and that which Ibn Mas'ud mentioned in his mushaf - is not part of the Qur'an, because there is no proof of its being so." As Fadil al-Qummi observes in al­Qawanin: "Shadhdh traditions not acted upon because there is no proof of their contents being part of the Qur'an.”64

Traditions Implying the Presence of Certain Names: Of the traditions wherein some verses are mentioned in a form differing from that received through tawatur are those which relate to the particular historical context of their revelation (sha'n al-nuzul) and contain the addition of a few words to elucidate their meaning. These extra elements are either the words of the Prophet (S) or have been incorporated by one of the Companions in his mushaf, or are additions made by the Companions themselves.

'Ali (A) states: "I had surely come to them with a book compris­ing both the text of the revelation and its interpretation."65

We have already mentioned that 'Ali (A) had mentioned in his mushaf the sha'n of the verses, and Ibn Skin had sought this mushaf for the sake of the information it contained, but was unable to find it.

As to those traditions which entail that the name of 'Ali (A) had occurred in some verses - aside from their possible inauthenticity on the basis of their narrators' character - it is also possible to include them in this class of traditions, considering that we have some traditions which negate the presence of `Ali's name in the Qur'an. The following is one from al-Kafi from Abu Basir from al-Imam al-.Sadiq (A):

    عن أبي بصير عن ابي عبدالله (ع) فقلت له أن الناس يقولون: فما له لم يُسَمِّ علياً في القرآن و أهل بيته في كتاب الله؟ فقال: فقولوا لهم ان رسول الله نزلت عليه الصلاة و لم يسم ثلاثاً و اربعاً حتى كان رسول الله هو الَّذي فسر لهم ذلك.

Abu Basir says: "I said to him that people ask why God has not mentioned the name of 'Ali (A) and his household in the Qur'an? The Imam replied:

'Tell them that the command of salat was delivered to the Prophet (S) with­out God's mentioning specifically the number of rakat as three or four, and it was the Prophet (S) who explained this to them.' "66

This tradition explicitly negates the presence of 'Ali's (A) name in the Qur'an, and therefore those traditions which entail the mention of 'Ali's (A) name in some verses should be considered as furnishing explanatory details.

Accordingly, al-Imam al-Sadiq (A) usually used to recite the verse: يا ايها الرسول بلِّغ ما أُنزل اليك من ربك و ان لم تفعل فما بلَّغت رسالته , without adding to it the name of 'Ali ( ).67 The Ahl al-Sunnah have narrated traditions regard­ing this verse which include 'Ali's (A) name in it.68

Another tradition which confirms what has been said is narrated by Muhammad ibn al-Fudayl from Aba al-Hasan al-Madi, i.e. al-Imam al-Kazim (A):

    قال: قلتُ هذا الذي كنتم تكذبون فقال الامام (ع) يعني أمير المؤمنين: قلت تنزيل؟ قال: نعم.

(Muhammad ibn al-Fudayl says:) "I asked the Imam (A) regarding the verse هذا الذي كنتم به تكذبون..; He replied: 'It implies Amir al-Mu'minin (A).' I inquired: 'Is it tanzil?"Yes,' replied the Imam."69

This tradition clearly indicates that the name of 'Ali (A) was not mentioned in the Quranic verse but was present in the exposition revealed by God concerning the intent of the verse.70

Among the traditions of this kind is a tradition narrated by both the Shia and Sunni works concerning the verse: وحافظوا على الصلوات والصلاة الوسطى where they have added to it the words 'salat al-`asr. ;71

It is obvious that the addition of the words salat al-'asr to the text does not imply that it is a part of the verse; rather, it is an explana­tion of the phrase al-salat al-asr in the verse. Therefore al-Qadi, while refuting those who have ascribed to Ibn Mas'ud the exclusion of the Mu`awwidhatan (the last two surah s, al-Nas and al-Falaq) from his mushaf and to Ubayy ibn Ka`b the inclusion of two additional siurahs, al-Hafd and al-Khal , in his mushaf, , says that it is possible that Ubayy had recorded in his mushaf some interpretative remarks and prayers. He states: "He had recorded in his mushaf interpretations and prayers which are not parts of the Qur'an.,72

Al-Baqillani has also refuted this allegation saying, "The prayer recited in qunat , which is narrated to have been recorded by Ubayy ibn Ka`b in his mushaf, has no proof for considering it a part of the Qur'an. Rather, it is a kind of a prayer, and had it been a part of the Qur'an it would have been transmitted to us and we would have the knowledge of its authenticity."73

Regrettably, while Sunni scholars have tried to overcome the dif­ficulties raised by the statements of their authorities and explained them away, they have not adopted a similar attitude regarding the traditions entailing tahrif narrated from the Imams of the Shiah nor bothered to examine their authenticity. Rather some anti-Shii pro­pagandists bent on the villification of the Shiah have taken the sole presence of such traditions in Shii works as an evidence that the Shiah believe in tahrif of the Holy Qur'an.

Al-Fayd al-Kashani states: "It would not be far-fetched if said that some of the deletions were of the nature of exegetical clarifications without being parts of the Qur'an. Thus any change that may have occur­red is one of meaning, i.e. the charge of alteration and corruption relates to exposition and interpretation. It implies that the meaning ascribed was different from

the actual intent. Thus the import of the Imam's state­ment كَذا نزلت (this is how it was revealed) is that its meaning has been altered; not that the verse was revealed with such additional words and then they were deleted from it.74

Al-Shaykh al-Mufid states: "...But the revealed expository and exegetical matter recorded in the mushaf of Amir al-Mu'minin (A) was deleted, even though it was an established revelation (thabitan munzalan), although not part of the text of the kalam of God Almighty which is the miraculous Qur'an. The ta 'wil of the Qur'an has also been called 'Qur'an' ...and there is no difference of opinion among the exegetes about this:75

Similarly, al-Shaykh al-Saduq has pointed out that some revelations are not part of the Qur'an, such as the counsel given by Gabriel to the Prophet (S) and to which the Prophet (S) refers in many of his traditions. Al- Saduq says: "The like of it are many, all of which are revelation without being a part of the Qur'an. For had it been part of the Qur'an, it would have been joined to and combined with the Qur'an instead of being separated from it."76

Traditions Explicitly Mentioning Tahrif : Other traditions which allude to the presence of tahrif are those which speak of the Qur'an as muhar­raf (altered, corrupted). It should be pointed that these traditions men­tion the presence of tahrif in the meaning of verses and not in their words. This is indicated by the following tradition narrated by Al ­Kulayni in Rawdat al-Kafi. In a letter al-Imam al-Baqir (A) writes to Sa'd al-Khayr:

 ... وكان مِن نَبْذِهِم الكتاب أن أقاموا حروفه و حرَّفوا حدوده فهم يرونه، ولا يرعونه، والجهال يعجبهم حفظهم للرواية، والعلماء يحزنهم تركهم للرعاية، وكان من نبذهم الكتاب ان ولوه الَّذين لا يعلمون فأوردوهم الهوى و اصدروهم الى الردى وغيَّروا عُرى الدين ثم ورَّثوه في السَّفَهِ و الضِّبا.

Surah Bayyinah, Chapter 98

(The Clear Evidence)

Number of Verses: 8

Contents of the Surah

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In The Name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful

The contents of the Surah attests to the fact that it was revealed in Medina, because, the People (Jews and Christians) of the Book (the Scripture) are repeatedly talked about, and we know that at the time of revelation the communication between the Muslims and the people of the Book occurred mostly in Medina.

Furthermore, the words of the Surah are both about prayers and alms. It is true that the duty of paying the alms-tax was issued in Mecca, but the act of spreading this idea with the necessary formalities, was extended in Medina.

In any case, this Surah refers to the universal message of our holy Prophet (S) in the same line of prophecy that the Jews and Christians received their scriptures. They should have prepared themselves for the Advent of the greatest and last of the prophets, but when the awaited Prophet, whom they were waiting for, came with clear signs and evidences, they rejected him, because they were not really searching for truth; they only followed their own desires to gain worldly profits.

By the way, this Surah shows the fact that the doctrine of the prophets such as Faith, monotheism, prayers and fasting are eternal and unchangeable principles in all Divine religions.

In another part of the Surah the different reactions of the pagans and the People of the Book, regarding the invitation to Islam, are referred to saying that those who believe and do righteous deeds are the best of all creatures, and those who disbelieve and refuse to worship Him are certainly the worst of all creatures.

The most popular titles of this Surah are: ‘Bayyinah’, ‘Lam Yakun’, and ‘Ghayyimah’; titles which come from the text, itself.

The Virtue in Studying Surah Bayyinah

On the virtue in reciting this Surah, there is a tradition from the holy Prophet (S) who has said:

“If people knew how blessful this Surah is (Bayyinah), they would leave their property and family to learn it”.

Someone from the' Khaza'ih’ people asked:

“O Messenger of Allah! What is the reward for reciting it?”.

He (S) answered:

“Neither a hypocrite nor those in whose hearts contain doubt about Allah recite it. By Allah, the near-stationed angels have been reciting it from the time the heavens and the earth were created and do not languish in its recitation.

There will be no servant who recites it at night but that Allah sends angels who protect him in his Faith and his present life and that seek forgiveness and mercy for him; and when on the day he recites it, he will be rewarded as much as what the day sheds light upon and what the night darkens.”1

Surah Bayyinah, Verses 1-5

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيمِ

In The Name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful

لَمْ يَكُنِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ مُنفَكِّينَ حَتَّى تَأْتِيَهُمُ الْبَيِّنَةُ

رَسُولٌ مِّنَ اللَّهِ يَتْلُو صُحُفًا مُّطَهَّرَةً

فِيهَا كُتُبٌ قَيِّمَةٌ

وَمَا تَفَرَّقَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ إِلَّا مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءتْهُمُ الْبَيِّنَةُ

وَمَا أُمِرُوا إِلَّا لِيَعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ الدِّينَ حُنَفَاء وَيُقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَيُؤْتُوا الزَّكَاةَ وَذَلِكَ دِينُ الْقَيِّمَةِ

1. “Those who reject (Truth) from among the People of the Book and the polytheists were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence,”

2. “A Messenger from Allah, reciting pure scriptures;”

3. “Wherein are laws right and straight.”

4. “Nor were those divided who were given the Book, except after the Clear Evidence had come to them.”

5. “And they were ordered no more than that they should worship Allah (alone) being sincere to Him in obedience, upright, to keep up prayer, and pay zakat (poor-rate) and that is the religion right and straight.”

The Religion Right and Straight

At the beginning of the Surah the situation before Islam, the People of the Book and the pagan Arabs, is referred to.

It says:

“Those who reject (Truth) from among the People of the Book and the polytheists were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them the Clear Evidence,”

“A Messenger from Allah, reciting pure scriptures;”

“Wherein are laws right and straight.”

Yes, they said that they were convinced of the coming of the Prophet of Islam (S), but later when his heavenly Book was revealed the circumstances changed and they differed in their ideas about the religion of Allah.

It says:

“Nor were these divided who were given the Book, except after the Clear Evidence had come to them.”

Thus, the aforementioned verses reveal that the claim of the People of the Book and the disbelievers was that they insisted on a prophet having clear evidences to accept. But, when the clear evidence, Islam, and the awaited prophet, in the person of Muhammad (S) arrived, they rejected the religion of Islam and resisted the Prophet except for a minority of them.

The preceding verse is similar to the content of Surah Baqarah, No. 2 Verse 89 which says:

“And when there comes to them a Book from Allah, confirming what if with them, although from of old they had prayed for victory against those without Faith, when there comes to that which they (should) have recognized, they refuse to believe in it, but the curse of Allah if on those without Faith.”

We know that the People of the Book expected such an Advent and too, the Pagan Arabs, who knowing the People of the Book to be more learned than themselves, customarily followed the same idea and adopted it as their own, but after reaching their goals they changed the way and joined the opponents.

A group of commentators have another idea on the contents of these verses. They say that the objective meaning is that the mentioned people, not simply by mere claim, but, in actuality, did not leave their old belief until they had clear evidences.

This statement means that after having such clear evidences they accepted the Prophet, but this contrasts with the following verses which indicate that they did not. Or, it may be said that the objective meaning is that some of them believed, though they were in the minority.

But, this idea seems improbable and perhaps it was for the same reason that Fakhr-i-Razi in his commentary considered the first verse which to him is in contrast with the next verse, one of the most complicated verses of the Qur'an and then, in order to solve the problem he gave some explanations the best of which is the very one that we have mentioned above.

A third commentary exists which says that the objective meaning is that Allah does not leave the People of the Book and disbelievers to themselves unless He completes the argument; sends them an evidence, and shows them the straight way. For this reason He sent the Messenger of Islam to guide them.

In fact, this verse is a reference to 'the principle of favor' which is discussed in 'speculative theology' and states that Allah sends clear evidences for every sect to complete the argument.

In any case, the meaning of /bayyinah/, here is 'Clear Evidence' and whose example, according to the second verse, is the Messenger of Allah (S), himself, who had at his disposal the Holy Qur'an for his teachings.

The term /suhuf/ is a plural form of /sahifah/ which means 'a leaf or page of a book', or 'some leaves of paper on which something is written' and here it means 'the contents of them', because we know that the holy Prophet (S) could not read anything from the pages and therefore, was teaching the 'contents' of them.

And the purpose of using the term /mutahharah/ is that it was exactly the very truth, the original Word of Allah, in its purity, without corruption having polluted it, and far from the evil hands of Jinn and the human race; as is mentioned in Surah Fussilat, No. 41, verse 42:

“No falsehood can approach it from before or behind it...”

Now, Verse 3

“Wherein are laws...”

refers to the fact that, in these scriptures, there are, without doubt, decrees contained therein that are right and straight.

Therefore, /kutub/, here means 'what is written', or it means 'the laws or decrees appointed by Allah', because / kitabat/, in Arabic, has been used in the sense of 'prescribing a decree' as in Surah Baqarah, No. 2, verse 183:

“O ye who believe! Fasting is prescribed to you as it was prescribed to those before you that ye may learn self-restraint.”

Then, the term /qayyimah/ means 'smooth, straight, right, strong, confirmed, valuable, worthy' or all these meanings collectively.

It is also probable that since the Qur'an contains all that the former scriptures had, besides many other additional points, then, it is said that therein are the right ordinances of the past.

It is worthy to note that in the first verse 'the People of the Book' is mentioned prior to 'the polytheists' but, in the fourth verse only 'the People of the Book' is mentioned and while 'polytheists' is not stated, the verse refers to both of them.

Apparently, these differences may be for that, in this matter, the People of the Book were the main rejectors and the polytheists were their dependants; or for that the People of the Book deserved more blame, because they had many men of knowledge among them and had a higher standard of theology than the polytheists therefore, their rejection was more disgraceful and blameworthy.

Then, the Qur'an reproaches 'the People of the Book' and the polytheists saying:

“And they were ordered no more than that they should worship Allah (alone) being sincere to Him in obedience, upright, and to keep up prayer, and pay zakat (poor-rate) and that is the religion right and straight.”

On the phrase

/wa ma umiru/ “and they were ordered no more”,

some have cited that the purpose of using this phrase is that the People of the Book already had the three eternal principles in their own religion: Unity of God, prayer, and alms. These are some fixed principles, but those people were not true to their promise concerning these principles.

Furthermore, the same decrees, in Islam, are, also, pure monotheism, prayer and alms which are the same eternal principles. So, why did they refuse to accept them?

Using this phrase, then, seems more suitable, because, /umiru/ ‘ordered', refers to the acceptance of the new religion, that which was mentioned in the preceding verse, over which 'they divided'.

Some of the commentators believe that using the word /din/ ‘religion', here means 'worship' and the phrase 'no more than that they should worship Allah (alone)’, confirms this idea.

The term /hunafa/ is the plural form of /hanif /derived from /hanaf/ ‘pure in faith' and as Raqib cites in Mufradat it means 'to decline from aberration to the straight way'. All those who make pilgrimage to Kaaba or were circumcised were called /hanif/, by the Arabs, referring to the fact that they had believed in Abraham's religion.

On the whole, this word in lexicology and in various dictionaries originally means 'crookedness or inclination', but, in the Qur'an and Islamic traditions it has been used with the sense of 'declining from polytheism and inclining toward monotheism and the straight way'.

The phrase 'the religion right and straight' denotes that those principles, i.e., pure montheism, prayers and alms, are eternal and unchangeable in all religions, or it can be said that they are found within the nature of all human beings.

So, the destiny of Man leads him to monotheism and his nature invites him to being grateful to his Lord, knowing His divine essence, and further, Man's social spirit calls him to the service of the deprived by practicing deeds of charity.

Therefore, the root of these characteristics, in general, exists in all humans and that is why these laws are also found in the teachings of all the former prophets and are the core in the teachings of the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (S).

Surah Bayyinah, Verses 6-8

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ فِي نَارِ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ شَرُّ الْبَرِيَّةِ

إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ أُولَٰئِكَ هُمْ خَيْرُ الْبَرِيَّةِ

جَزَاؤُهُمْ عِندَ رَبِّهِمْ جَنَّاتُ عَدْنٍ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا رَّضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُوا عَنْهُ ذَلِكَ لِمَنْ خَشِيَ رَبَّهُ

6. “Surely those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and the polytheists shall be in the fire of Hell, therein dwelling forever; they are the worst of all creatures.”

7. “Surely those who believe and do righteous deeds, they are the best of all creatures.”

8. “Their reward with their Lord will be Gardens of eternity, beneath which rivers flow, therein dwelling forever; Allah is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him. That is for him who fears his Lord and Cherisher.”

The Best and the Worst Creatures

In the former verses, it was mentioned that the people of the Book and the polytheists were waiting for clear evidence to be sent by Allah, but when it came they were dispersed and everyone went his separate way.

In the following verses, from the point of Faith in truth, people are divided into two groups believers and disbelievers, and then the fate of each is pointed out.

At first it says:

“Surely those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and the polytheists shall be in the fire of Hell, therein dwelling forever, they are the worst of all creatures.”

The term /kafaru/ ‘they disbelieved', here refers to their blasphemy rather than their being Muslim, otherwise their previous infidelity was not a new matter.

The phrase

“They are the worst of all creatures”

is a startling statement which shows that among all the living and non-living creatures there is nothing worse than those who left the right path and went astray after the truth became clear and the argument and reason became complete.

This is, in fact, like that which is mentioned in Surah Anfal, No. 8, verse 22:

“For the worst of beasts in the sight of Allah are the deaf and the dumb. Those who understand not”.

Or similar still, to what Surah A'raf, No. 7, verse 179 says after referring to the people of Hell with the same characteristics:

“...they are like cattle, nay more misguided: for they are heedless (of warning)”.

There is also a point in the current verse which goes beyond these matters, because it introduces them as

“The worst of all creatures”,

and this is, indeed, a statement of evidence for their perpetual stay in the fire of Hell.

And why not! They were the worst of all creatures, because all the means of salvation were being prepared for them, but they refused it intentionally, due to their pride, deceit and enmity.

In this verse, again, the phrase 'the People of Book' is mentioned prior to 'polytheists' perhaps for the reason that they had heavenly Books and learned men among them and also possessed some signs and information about the Prophet of Islam which were clearly mentioned in their Books. Therefore, their rejection was more hideous and indecent.

In the next verse, the contrasting group, who are in a higher position, are referred to.

It says:

“Surely those who believe and do righteous deeds, they are the best of all creatures.”

Then their rewards are pointed out:

“Their rewards with their Lord will be Gardens of eternity, beneath which rivers flow, therein dwelling forever; Allah is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him. That is for him who fears his Lord and Cherisher”.

This high rank and the splendid, unparalleled rewards are for the one who fears his Lord:

“That is for him who fears his Lord and Cherisher”.

It is worthy to note that when speaking about the righteous, it also mentions 'doing good deeds', which is in fact the fruit of Faith, and indicates that a mere claim of Faith is not enough. Man's conduct should adapt to this Faith, too. But blasphemy itself even with the lack of evil action causes aberration in Man and this is apart from the fact that blasphemy is usually the source of many kinds of sin, crimes, and wrong actions.

The phrase:

“They are the best of all creatures”

clearly shows that good believing people who do righteous deeds are even higher than the angels, because the verse is general and there is no exception made in it.

There are other verses, also, that are witness to this idea like the verses concerning the prostration of the angels to Adam, and the verse:

“We have honoured the sons of Adam...”2 .

However, in this verse, the material and physical rewards of the righteous; gardens full of different blessings in Heaven, are mentioned first, and then, their spiritual reward is referred to, that is;

“...Allah is well-pleased with them and they are well-pleased with Him”.

They are well-pleased with Allah because whatever they have asked of Him, He has given them and if they erred He forgave them by His Grace. What pleasure can be better or higher than that one feels that his beloved, his Lord, accepts him and is pleased with him and he succeeds to be close to Him.

Yes, the Paradise, for Man's body, is the eternal Gardens of the next world, but the Paradise for his soul is the Lord's pleasure.

The sentence:

“That is for him who fears his Lord and Cherisher”

shows that all these gifts come into being because of the existence of the 'fear of Allah' since it is the motive of all obedience, piety, and righteous deeds.

It should also be noted that the 'fear of Allah' is the fear to offend His holy Law, the fear to do anything which is against His holy Will. Such fear is akin to love; for with it dawns the consciousness of Allah's loving care for all His creatures.

Some of the commentators have combined this verse with Surah Fatir, No. 35, Verse 28:

“...those truly fear Allah among His servants, who have knowledge...”,

and have concluded that Paradise is, in fact, the incontestable right of the scientists and learned people.

Of course, regarding the fact that the 'fear of Allah' has stages and degrees as well as knowledge, which has hierarchies too, the meaning of this statement is clear.

By the way, some believe that the position of /xasiyat/ is higher than that of /xauf/ because the latter is used for any fear, but the former is a kind of fear mixed with exaltation and respect.

Explanation: Hazrat Ali (as) and His Followers are 'the Best Creatures'

There are a great many narrations quoted by famous Sunnite and Shi'ite sources in which the verse:

“...they are the best of all creatures”

is rendered to mean Hazrat Ali (as) and his followers.

Hakim Haskani Neyshaburi, one of the famous Sunnite scholars, in the fifth century A.H., has cited some narrations with different references whose number is more than twenty in his well-known book Shawahid-ut-Tanzil.

The following are some examples:

1. Ibn-Abbas says that when the verse:

“Surely those who believe and do righteous deeds, they are the best of all creatures”

was revealed, the holy Prophet (S) told Hazrat Ali (as):

“It is you and your followers who will come on the Day of Reckoning when you and your followers are well-pleased (yourselves) and well-pleasing Him and your enemy will come angrily pushed (into Hell)”.3

2. Abu Barazah has narrated a tradition from the Prophet (S) who recited the verse and said:

“They are you and your followers. O' Ali! The appointment for you and me is (beside) the Pool of Abundance”4

('Haud' is the pool of 'Kawthar').

3. Jabir-ibn-'Abdillah-Ansari narrates in another tradition that they were sitting with the holy Prophet (S) in the Sacred House when Ali (as) came to them.

As soon as the Prophet (S) saw him, he said:

“My brother is coming to you”.

Then, he turned toward the Ka'ba and said:

“By the Lord of this Structure! Surely this man and his followers will be triumphant on the Day of Judgement”.

Then, he addressed them and added:

“By Allah! Truly he was formost to all of you in believing in Allah; and among you all he is the most correct in obeying Allah; the most faithful in fulfilling the covenant of Allah; the hardest to the decree of Allah, the best distributor of the (treasury) in equality, the justest to the citizen and the most important in position with Allah”.

Jabir said it was then that Allah sent down the verse:

“Surely those who believe and do righteous deeds, they are the best of all creatures”,

and from then on whenever Ali came, the Helpers of the Prophet (S) would say:

“The best of all creatures next to the Messenger of Allah came”.5

The descent of this verse, in Mecca, does not contrast with the idea that the Surah is Medinan, because it might have been revealed, again, there. Further, the descent of this verse might have happened on one of the holy Prophet's trips from Medina to Mecca, in particular that the reporter of the narration is 'Jabir-ibn-'Abdillah-Ansari' who joined the Prophet (S) in Medina. Then, terming these kinds of verses 'Medinan' is not improbable.

Some of these traditions are cited by 'Ibn-Hijr' in 'Sawa'iq' and some others by 'Muhammad Shablanji' in 'Nur-ul-Absar'.6

A great part of the last narration is narrated from Ibn- 'Asakir, from Jabir-ibn-'Abdillah by Jalal-id-Din-Suyuti in Durr-ul-Manthur.

4. It is narrated from Ibn-'Abbas in Durr-ul-Manthur that when the verse.

“Surely those who believe and do righteous deeds, they are the best of all creature.”

was revealed the holy Prophet (S) told Ali:

“It is you and your followers who, on the Day of Reckoning are well-pleased (yourselves) and well-pleasing (Him).”7

5. In another tradition, the above mentioned person narrates from Ibn-Marduyah from Hazrat Ali (as) that the Prophet (S) had told him (Ali):

“Have you not heard the word of Allah:

'Surely those who believe and do righteous deeds, they are the best of all creature'?

You and your followers are those and the appointment place of mine and yours will be at the Pool of Abundance'. When I come for the account of nations you will be invited in the case that your foreheads are white (to be known)”.8

Many other Sunnite scholars have also cited the same meaning in their works including: Khatib Kharazmi in 'Manaqib', Abu-Na'im Isfahani in' Kifayat -ul -Khisam', 'Allamah Tabari in his famous commentary, Tabari, Ibn- Shabbaq Maliki in 'Fusul-ul-Muhimmah', Allamah Shoukani in' Fath-ul-Qadir', Shaykh Sulayman Qanduzi in 'Yanabi' -ul- Mawwadah', Alusi in' Ruh -ul -Ma'ani', and some others.

In conclusion, the above mentioned tradition is one of the famous traditions that is accepted by a great many scholars of Islam. And this, in itself, is an important, matchless excellence for Hazrat Ali (as) and his followers.

By the way, this narration makes this fact clear that the term 'Shi'ah' was applied and was spread among Muslims by the Prophet (S), himself, at that time, and it refers to the particular followers of Amir-al-Mo'mineen Ali (as).

The Necessity of Intention in Adorations

Some of the scholars of the principles of Islamic Jurisprudence have taken the verse:

“And they were ordered no more than that they should worship Allah (alone) being sincere to Him in obedience...”

as an evidence for (niyyat) 'intention' with divine motive being necessary in 'worship' and this depends on the word 'din', here to be meant 'worship' so that it becomes a reason for the necessity of sincerity in worship.

We should also take the term

/amr/, 'command'

in this verse, unlimited in order to have a sense of necessity of intention with divine motive in all commands. However, the meaning of the verse does not seem to be either of them, but the purpose of the verse is to prove monotheism in contrast with polytheism. It means they are only invited to monotheism.

The Wonderful Heights and Depths to Which Man Can Reach

We understand, clearly, from the verses of this Surah that there is no creature in the world like, Man to be able to gain the highest ranks and being the best of all by doing righteous deeds, (note that 'righteous deeds' includes all good deeds; not only a part of them), and if he goes on the path of blasphemy and aberration he will fall so deep that he can be the worst of all creatures.

The vast, great distance between these two extremes of highness and lowliness of Man; although a very sensitive and dangerous status for him, indicates his dignity and capability of development. It is natural that Man, with such an efficiency and extraordinary potentiality, is also quite close to the possibility of extraordinary aberration.

Supplication

O Lord! We look to You, Your Grace, to gain the high rank of “The best of all creatures”.

O Lord! Count us among the followers of the man who deserves this title the best.

O Lord! Endow us with such a sincerity that we worship and love nothing but You.

Notes

1. Majma’ al-Bayan, vol. 10, p. 521

2. Surah Bani Israel, No. 17, verse. 70

3. Shawahid-ut-Tanzil, vol. 2, p. 357, tradition 1126.

4. Shawahid-ut-Tanzil, vol. 2, p. 359, tradition 1130.

5. Shawahid-ut- Tanzil, vol 2, p 362, tradition 1139

6. al-Sawa'iq ul Muharraqah, p 96, and Nur-ul-Absar, p 70, 101

7. Durr-ul Manthur, vol 6, p 379

8. Ibid