Alhassanain(p) Network for Heritage and Islamic Thought

Alhassanain (p) Network for Islamic Heritage and Thought

The Collection and Preservation of the Qur'an

Author (s): Ayatullah Sayyid Abulqasim al-Khui

Publisher (s): MadrasaAs Syed al Khui

www.alhassanain.org/english

Table of Contents

Foreword 4

Introduction 6

Note 7

The Holy Qur’an, Pure, Pristine and Unprofaned 8

The Meaning of Tahrif 9

Note 10

Muslim view on Tahrif 11

Note 11

Abrogation of Recitation a Fact or a Myth 12

Tradition n. 1 12

Tradition n. 2 12

Tradition n. 3 13

Tradition n. 4 13

Tradition n. 5 13

Tradition n. 6 13

Tradition n. 7 13

Tradition n. 8 13

Tradition n. 9 14

Tradition n. 10 14

Tradition n. 11 14

Tradition n. 12 14

Notes 15

Tahrif and the Book Itself 17

Tahrif and Sunnah 20

Note 22

Permission to Recite the Surah in the Prayers 23

The Claim that Tahrif was caused by the Caliphs 24

Notes 26

Some Doubts by those who believe in Tahrif 27

First Doubt 27

Second Doubt 28

Third Doubt 30

Notes 30

The Traditions about Tahrif 31

Tradition n. 1 31

Tradition n. 2 31

Tradition n. 3 31

Tradition n. 4 31

Tradition n. 5 32

Tradition n. 6 32

Tradition n. 7 32

Tradition n. 8 32

True Meaning of the Traditions 33

The Fourth Doubt 36

Notes 36

A Reflection on the Collection of the Holy Qur’an 37

The Traditions about the Compilation of the Qur’an 38

Report n. 1 38

Report n. 2 38

Report n. 3 39

Report n. 4 39

Report n. 5 39

Report n. 6 39

Report n. 7 39

Report n. 8 40

Report n. 9 40

Report n. 10 40

Report n. 11 40

Report n. 12 41

Report n. 13 41

Report n. 14 41

Report n. 15 41

Report n. 16 42

Report n. 17 42

Report n. 18 42

Report n. 19 42

Report n. 20 42

Report n. 21 42

Report n. 22 43

Notes 43

The Contradictions 44

Note 45

Their Conflict with Other Traditions Related to the Compilation of the Qur’an 46

Notes 47

Their Conflict with the Qur’an itself 48

Their Conflict with Reason 49

(a) The Eloquence and Rhetoric of the Qur'an 49

(b) The Prophet's inclination to preserve the Qur'an 49

(c) Memorization 49

(d) Rewards 49

Notes 50

Their Conflict with Consensus 51

Those Traditions and Interpolations 52

Note 53

Conclusion 54

Foreword

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الحمد لله الذي انزل على عبدة الكتاب ولم يجعل لة عوجا

وافضل صلوات الله واكمل تسليماته على رسوله الذي ارسلة بالهدى

وعلى آله المصطفين الاخيار الذين آمنوا به وعزروه ونصروه واتبعوا النور الذي معه

"In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. Praisebe to Allah Who has sent to His servant The Book and has allowed no deviation therein. And the best of Allah's blessings and His most complete peace upon His Apostle whom he sent with His Guidance. And upon his chosen, virtuous progeny who believed in him, honoured him, helped him and followed the LightWhich was sent down to him".

Amid all the diversity of thoughts, leanings and inter­pretations, Muslims are united by a single cohesive force, an eternal and abiding miracle of Muhammad (‘s); Holy Qur'an. A prince among the revealed Books, Qur'an has remained pristine and unsullied by the profane hands.

The external forces working restlessly to wreck the Mus­lim unity and consensus have now resorted to a new ploy. From among the Muslims themselves, they have succeeded to instigate sectarian differences based on Qur'an. We now see scholars of one sect accusing the followers of another sect of disbelieving in Qur'an, or believing in a Book which has disappeared or been interpolated.

From Saudi Arabia, South Africa and particularly Pakistan, recent publications against the Shi’a sect harp on one and the same note. They go to wearisome and tedious lengths, just to prove that the Shi’asare not Muslims because they do not believe in the existing Qur'an. It is surprising to find a man of Abul Hasan Nadawis' calibre joining the notorious band and entering inextricably into the quagmire. The forces of kufr have thus successfully created a wider chasm between the two main sects of Islam, the Shi’a and the Sunni; and some scholars have played into their hands.

The fact is neither Sunni nor Shi’a Muslims believe in any Our'an other than the existing one, nor do they sub­scribe to the views supporting interpolations, distortions, omissions, additions or any sort of tampering in the Holy Book.

In our selection of two chapters from Ayatullah Sayyid Abul Qasim al-Khu’i's famous work al Bayan fi Tafsiril Qur'an we have deliberately given a prime choice to the subjects of Tahrif and collection of the Qur'an. Later, we hope to translate and publish further chapters so that, eventually, whole book is placed in the hands of the Mus­lim as well as non-Muslim readers.

Ayatullah al-Khu’i completed this work decades ago. He is one of the great Shi’a mujtahids of this era, internationally known for his erudition. The book was acclaimed as a masterpiece by Shi’a as well as Sunni scholars, leaving no doubt in the minds of its readers that Qur'an as a great force binding all the Muslims together has come to stay for ever.

The line of argument pursued by Ayatullah al-Khu’i is unique. While he enumerates and discusses all the reports from Shi’a as well as Sunni sources, he very ably conclu­des that according to the reliable and authentic traditions, Qur'an has remained pure, pristine and unprofaned. His arguments proving that the belief in Tahrif goes against al-Kitab (i.e. Qur'an), as-Sunnah, al-Aql and al-Ijma', are compelling and persuasive. His analysis of all those reports which indicate desultory, unmethodical and haphazard later day collection of Qur'an leaves no shred of doubt that they are false and fabricated.

In his preface to the first edition of al-Bayan fi Tafsiril Qur'an, al Khui writes:-

"I was enamoured by Qur'an from the childhood, always keen to unravel its secrets and to discover its meaning. It behoves every true Muslim, and even non-Muslim thinkers to ponder over Qur'an, to unfold its hidden meaning and to benefit from its light.For it is a Book which has a message for human welfare and guides it to success and salvation. Qur'an is a reference for the linguist, a guide to the grammarian, an authority for the jurist, an example for the refined,a lost treasure for the wise. It even guides those who admonish and shows the goal in life. It is a source of social as well as political sciences, and upon itrest the sciences of Islam. It will reveal to you the fascinating secrets.of Nature, and introduce you to the laws of crea­tion. Qur'an is the abiding miracle of this ever lasting religion, and a code of conduct based on the high and esteemed Shari’ah".

It is our earnest hope that this publication will serve to bridge the gap between Muslims, created by the subtle forces of kufr. Further, it will Inshallah enable them, both Shi’a and Sunni, to realize that Qur'an is their only hope of deliverance from the unscrupulous manipulations of un­-Islamic and anti-Islamic propagandists. Let no Muslim be deceived into believing that he or his brother, despite the sectarian differences, believes in any authority other than that of the existing Qur'an. It is complete, pure, pristine and unaltered.

Secretariat

The World Federation of K.S.I. Muslim Communities

London

Introduction

To things immortal, time can do no wrong,

And that which never is to die, for ever must be young.

With the passage of time, many great messages have been lost, and those which have survived must be subjec­ted to close scrutiny. How often do we hear and learn a corrupt version of a statement or an event, even if the lapse of time in between was short? It was perhaps for this reason that even Emerson, the famous and comparatively cheerful sage, declared: "The surest poison is time.". His­tory has always been haunted by this ravaging and devour­ing aspect of time.

Ever since man was created, the principle message to him has been that of absolute unity of God, and that all men and women are his slaves. Today, the defaced form of this message is visible in the form of numerous deities, some openly polytheistic, others under the guise of mon­otheism. The great books revealed to the early Prophets have been victims of profane hands which succeeded even to convert some parts of the sacred texts into the most tasteless and immoral anecdotes and parables. The subst­ance of the original message was deliberately allowed to disappear with a growing number of interpolations.

Humanity today would have had no chance whatsoever to know about the message in its pristine form, had it not been redeemed by the great Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (peace be upon him and his progeny). Among the hostile people of various shades of faith, some engaged in poly­theism while others in dualism and trinity of godhead, his famous simple dictum was: "Say: There is no God but Allah, and you will be saved". All gods, made of metal wood or other materials, and those comprising of pious prophets and virtuous men and women, were asked to succumb before one God, Allah, and His Will. He told humanity then, and continues to do so even today, that the eternal message from Allah is that of His absolute unity, and that none be worshipped; not even human desire which lies like a venomous viper in the bosoms.

This great message is enshrined in the Qur'an, the only book of God, which has remained unsullied, untainted, pure and unprofaned. The sure greedy hands of time could not destroy the sacrosanct quality of Qur'an, not because it was not tried, - but because Qur'an is inherently incorruptible. It has a style and form which is inimitable, rendering any change or alteration creeping stealthily into it easily detect­ible. The transmission of every verse of this great Book has been continuous ever since it left the lips of the Prophet as a revelation from Allah. And then there is the content of the Book, destined to remain an illuminating, ever shining light for those who grope in darkness. Qur'an is irreplaceable.

Our sixth Imam, Ja’far as-Sadiq (‘a) has said:

"Qur'an is living, its message never died. It turns like the turn of day andnight, it is in motion like the sun and the moon. It will embrace the last of us, the way it embraced the first of us"1

Sadly enough, Muslims have recently initiated a mud slinging match amongst themselves, accusing each other of disbelief in the Qur'an or interpolation. Such an attack from non-Muslims is understandable, because Qur'an stands in a sharp contrast to the corrupted divine texts they hold in their hands.But why the Muslims?

Ayatullah Sayyid Abul Qasim al Khui, the great Mujtahid of our era, examines here the subject with an insight singular­ly his own.

Note

1. Al-Ayyashi

The Holy Qur’an, Pure, Pristine and Unprofaned

Before we dwell upon this subject at length, we feel it is necessary to discuss certain connected issues which cannot be overlooked, that are the following:

• The Meaning of Tahrif (interpolation or tampering);

• Muslim view on Tahrif;

• Abrogation of Recitation a Fact or a Myth;

• Tahrif and the Book Itself;

• Tahrif and Sunnah;

• Permission to Recite the Surah in the Prayers;

• The Claim that Tahrif was caused by the Caliphs;

• Some Doubts by those who believe in Tahrif;

• The Traditions about Tahrif;

• True Meaning of the Traditions.

The Meaning of Tahrif

The Meaning of Tahrif (interpolation or tampering)

This word is used with common denotations, some of which are acceptably applicable to the Qur’an; and the others are either inapplicable or disputed. The details are as below.

First, the meaning is to transfer an object from its place to another. Allah says:

مِنْ الَّذِينَ هَادُوا يُحَرِّفُونَ الْكَلِم عَنْ مَوَاضِعه

Muslims are agreed upon the fact that suchan interference has occurred in the Qur’an, because whenever someone interprets the Qur’an without understanding its true meaning and transforms its real meaning to something irrelevant, he tampers with it.

Many have introduced innovations and unfounded beliefs into Islam by basing their arguments on interpretation of the Qur’an according to their own whims and opinions.

There are several traditions which forbid this type of inter­pretations, and condemn its perpetrators. In al-Kafi, a tradition by Imam Muhammad al-Baqir (‘a) says that he wrote to Sa'ad al-Khayr:

"One of the examples of their repudiation of the Book has been that they stood by its letters and distorted its injunctions; they narrate it, but do not have deference to its teachings. The ignorant are impressed by their narrations and recitations, while the learned are grieved to see their disregard for its protec­tion..."1

Secondly, the meaning of Tahrif is an omission or an addition of a letter or a change in grammatical in­flections, without effecting any change in the content of the Qur’an. This change may sometimes not be discernible from the rest of the Qur’an.

This type of change has definitely occurred in the Qur’an. We have already pointed out earlier that the so called various readings of the Qur’an were not based on tawattur, which means that the Qur’an was really based on only one authentic system of reading, and the rest were either additions or omissions.

The third meaning of Tahrif is an omission or an addition of a word or two, at the same time leaving the essence of the Qur’an untouched.

It is the type of interpolation which surely occurred in the first century of Islam, and in the days of the companions of the Prophet (‘s). The fact that Uthman burnt up all other copies of the Qur’an, and ordered his emissaries to do away with all the copies other than the codex prepared by himself, is an ample proof that there existed some difference between his copy and the others, else he would not have asked for their destruc­tion.

In fact, some of the scholars have recorded those differences, like Abdullah b. Abi Dawud as-Sajistani who wrote a book titled: Kitabul Masahif. It could be inferred that some interpolation had occurred, either on the part of Uthman or on the part of the scribes who prepared their copies. But we will soon establish that the copy of Uthman was actually the one already known to the Muslims. It was the one which was handed over from the Prophet (‘s) and widely used. The Tahrif by way of addition or omission had occurred in those copies which ceased to exist after the era of Uthman. As for the existing Qur’an, it is totally free from any omission or addition.

In short, those who rightly believe that those extra codices of the Qur’an were not authenticated by tawattur, that is to say that their authenticity was not established by wide currency and acceptance among Muslims, for them it is also right to believe that this sort of tampering had occurred in the beginning, but it ceased to exist after the time of Uthman. This leads us to believe that only that Qur’an remained authentic which was supported by a continuous chain joined with the Prophet (‘s).

Those who hold that all the codices, despite their variations, were based ontawattur, will have to subscribe to the disputed view that Tahrif has occurred in the Qur’an, and that some parts of it is lost. Tabari has classified, as you have noticed earlier, that Uthman dismissed the six variations of reading, and allo­wed only one to sustain.

The fourth meaning of Tahrif is addition or suppression of an ayah or a Surah, at the same time preserving the revealed Qur’an intact, and accepting the fact that the Prophet (‘s) recited it as a part of the Qur’an.

And this has definitely occurred in the Qur’an. The "basmalah" for example, is an ayah for which Muslims unanimously hold that the Prophet (‘s) recited it before every Surah except the Surah of al-Tawbah. Yet, among the Ulama’ of Ahlus­Sunnah , it is a subject of dispute. Some of them suggest that it is not a part of the Qur’an, and the Malikites have gone to the extent as to consider it Makruh to recite it before the Surah of Fatihah in the daily prayers, except when one intends to thereby digress from another Surah. And then there is a group among them who say that it is a part of the Qur’an.

The Shi’asare unanimous that basmalah is a part of every Surah except al-Tawbah, and this has been accepted by some Sunni scholars as well. When we start our commentary of the Surah al-Fatihah, we will enlarge upon this subject. So we see that Tahrif in the form of exclusion or suppression has certainly taken place.

The fifth meaning of Tahrif is that an addition of such a nature has taken place which rendered certain parts un­authentic. This indeed is totally inapplicable to the Holy Qur’an. Such a change has not occurred in the Qur’an, and this must be believed in as cardinal part of the faith.

The sixth meaning is Tahrif by omission. This would imply that the Qur’an we have today is incomplete and that people are deprived of some parts of Qur’an.

It is over this implication that the dispute arose, with certain people rejecting it altogether, and certain group conceding it.

Note

1. al-Wafi, p.274

Muslim view on Tahrif

The accepted view of Muslims about the Qur’an is that it is free from all profanities and tampering. They firmly believe that the Book existing among them has the complete text of what was revealed to the great Prophet (‘s). Many scholars of repute have supported thisview, among them is Muhammad ibn Babawayh, popularly known as Sheikh Saduq, who has included this view in the principle tenets of Shia Ithna-Asheri sect. Sheikh al Taifah Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Tusi has dwelt on this subject in his commentary al Tibyan and in support of this view, has quoted his master Alamul Huda Sayyid Murtadha, relating his extensive arguments. The great com­mentator, aI Tabrasi, has lent credence to this view in the preface to his famous work Majma-ul-Bayan, and so has Shaikh Ja’far in his chapter on the Qur’an, from his book Kashful Ghita; wherein he claims a consensus on this view. Allamah Shahshahani in his book Al Urwatul Wuthqa says that the majority of mujtahids concur that there has been no Interpola­tion in the Qur’an; and Mulla Muhsin Kashani in his two worlds, al-Wafi and llm-ul-Yaqin reiterates the same view. We find this repeated by the great scholar Sheikh Muhammad Jawad al-Balaghi in the foreword to his Tafsir Ala-ur-Rahman.

Besides, many great scholars like Sheikh Mufid, Shaikh Bahai and Muhaqqiq Qadhi Nurullah are known to have been partisans of the view that there has been no tampering in the Qur’an. Even those great Shi’a scholars who wrote on the subject of Imamat, criticizing the factions which arose to usurp the rights of Ahl ul-Bayt ( ‘a), have not ascribed Tahrif to them. This is a very pertinent point, because had they subscribed to the view that the Qur’an had been profaned, they would have mentioned it with more candour than merely grieving about the burning up of the copies of the Qur’an or other similar matters.

To sum up, the general belief of Shi’a Ulama’ has been that the Qur’an is intact and pristine. Of course, there has been a small group of traditionalists, both among Shi’as and Sunnis, who held that the Qur’an has been tampered with. al-Rafai says: "A group of theologians used to hypothetical presumptions have subscribed to the view of Tahrif; those who have a habit of resorting to various methods of disputations in every word and in every law, have found it probable that something from the Qur’an may have been lost because of the way its collection has been described"1 . In Majma ul Bayan, Tabrasi has ascribed this view to the group of Hashaw­iyyah among Sunnis.

It will soon be evident from what follows that to confirm that the recitation of certain parts of the Qur’an had been abrogated is tantamount to believing in Tahrif. Those Ulama’ of Ahlu-s­Sunnah who declare such an abrogation are in reality declaring that some tampering has occurred in the Qur’an.

Note

1. Ijazul Qur’an, p.41

Abrogation of Recitation a Fact or a Myth

Most of the Sunni Ulama’ have mentioned that the recitation of some parts of the Qur’an was abrogated, confirming at the same time, through the reports, that those abrogated parts were in the Qur’an during the days of the Prophet (‘s). We will quote some of those reports here to prove that such a belief makes it necessary to also believe that an interpolation took place.

Tradition n. 1

(a) Ibn Abbas reports that Umar said while on the pulpit:

"God sent Muhammad (‘s) with Truth, and sent down unto him the Book. And among that which was revealed was an ayah about rajm which we read, understood and heeded. And based on that, the Prophet (‘s) stoned, and after him, we stoned. I fear that with the lapse of time, people may say: `we do not find the ayah of rajm in the book of God', and thus go astray by abandoning that which God has ordained. The ordi­nance of stoning was indeed prescribed for the adulterers in the book of God ….. And then, among verses we read, there was a verse which said1

ان لا ترغبوا عن ابائكم فانه كفر بكم أن ترغبوا عن آبائكم

or it was

ان كفرا بكم أن ترغبوا عن آبائكم

And Suyuti has mentioned: Ibn Ashtah has reported from Layth b. Sa'ad, who said:

"The first person to collect the Qur’an was Abu Bakr and Zaid wrote it down … And Umar came up with the ayah of rajm, but he did not record it because Umar was the sole reporter".2

This verse of rajm which Umar claimed to have been in the Qur’an, and was rejected, has been reported in several forms; among them are:

(i )

اذا زنى الشيخ والشيخة فارجموهما البتة نكالا من الله والله عزيز حكيم

and (ii)

الشيخ والشيخة فارجموهما البتة بما قضيا من اللذة

and (iii)

ان الشيخ والشيخة اذا زنيا فارجموهما البتة

Whatever be the case, there is nothing in the Qur’an today which indicates the law of stoning the adulterers. And if the reports are to be considered true, then it follows that an ayah has definitely disappeared from the Qur’an.

Tradition n. 2

(b) Tabrani has reported with reliable chain of narration from Umar b. al-Khattab:

"The Qur’an had one million and twenty seven thousand letters".3

While the existing Qur’an does not have even one third of the number. So, one is led to believe that more than two-third of the Qur’an has been lost.

Tradition n. 3

(c) Ibn Abbas reports from Umar:

"God sent Muhammad (‘s) with Truth and sent down unto him the Book. And among things revealed was an ayah of rajm. So the Prophet (‘s) stoned and after him we stoned too". Then Umar added: "We used to recite4

ولا ترغبوا عن آبائكم فانه كفربكم

or

ان كفرا بكم ان ترغبوا عن آبائكم

Tradition n. 4

(d) Nafe' reports that Ibn Umar said:

"One of you might claim that he has taken the complete Qur’an, but what does he know of the Complete Qur’an? Much from the Qur’an has disappeared, so he should say: I have taken what has been traced"5 .

Tradition n. 5

(e) Urwah b. Zubair reports from Aisha:

"The Surah of al-Ahzab as read during the times of the Prophet (‘s) comprised of two hundred verses. When Uth­man prepared the codex, we did not get except what it has remained to be"6 .

Tradition n. 6

(f) Hamidah binti Anas says:

It was read before my father who was 80, from the codex of Aisha:

ان لله وملئكته يصلون على النبي يا ايها الذين آمنوا صلو عليه وسلموا تسليما وعلى الذين يصلون الصفوف الاولى

She says: `This was before Uthman changed the texts'.

Tradition n. 7

(g) Abu Harb b. Abil Aswad reports from his father:

"Abu Musa Al-Asha'ri sent for the Qura' (the reciters of Basrah), and three hundred men called upon him, who had all read the Qur’an. Then hesaid : `You are the best of the people of Basrah, and their reciters. Read the Qur’an constantly, otherwise.before too long, your heart may harden the way the hearts of your predecessors had hardened. We used to read a Surah which we compared, in length and severity, with the Surah of Bara’ah, but I have now forgotten it, except a verse which says:

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

And we used to read a Surah which we compared with one of the musabbihat (Surahs which begin with sabbaha or yusab­bihu) but I have forgotten it except a verse I remember7 :

يا ايها الذين آمنوا لم تقولون ما لا تفعلون, فتكتب شهادة في اعناقكم فتسألون عنها يوم القيامة

Tradition n. 8

(h) Zarr says: Ubayy b. Ka'b told me, O Zarr: "How much of Surah of al Ahzab do you read?" I said: "Seventy three verses". He said: "though it was equal to the Surah of al Baqarah, or it was longer than that".8

Tradition n. 9

(i) Ibn Abi Dawud and Ibn Ambari report from Ibn Shihabi: "We have been informed that much more of the Qur’an had been revealed - but those who knew it were killed at Yamamah. They had preserved it, and it was never known or written after them..."9

Tradition n. 10

(j) Umrah reports from Aisha: "Among that which was revealed in the Qur’an, is the follow­ing verse:

عشر رضعات معلومات يحرمن

then it was abrogated to read

خمس معلومات

and they remained in the Qur’an till the Prophet (‘s) died.10

Tradition n. 11

(k) Miswar b. Makhramah reports: "Umar inquired from Abdul Rahman b. Awf if he had found the following ayah in the Qur’an:

............ أن جاهدوا كما جاهدتم اول مرة

Abdul Rahman answered that the ayah had disappeared along with the lost parts of the Qur’an.11

Tradition n. 12

(l) Abu Sufyan al-Kala'i says that Muslimah b. Mukhallad al-Ansari told them one day: "Inform me about those two verses of the Qur’an which were never recorded". None would answer, not even Abul Kanood, Sa'ad b. Malik who was there. Then Ibn Muslimah recited12 :

ان الذين آمنوا وهاجروا و جاهدوا في سبيل الله باموالهم وانفسهم الا أبشروا انتم المفلحون والذين آووهم ونصروهم وجادلوا عنهم قوم الذين غضب الله عليهم اولئك لا تعلم نفس ما اخفي لهم من قرة اعين جزاء بما كانوا يعلمون

And it has been narrated in various ways that the copies of Ibn Abbas and Ubayy b. Ka'ab contained two extra Surahs: Al-Khala' and Al-Hafd. It reads13 :

اللهم انا نستعينك ونستغفرك ونثني عليك ولا نكفرك ونخلع ونترك من يفجرك اللهم اياك نعبد ولك نصلى ونسجد واليك نسعى ونحفد نرجو رحمتك ونخشي عذابك ان عذابك بالكافرين ملحق

It is now evident that to say that certain parts of the Qur’an have been excluded from recitation means to confirm interpola­tion and omission in the Qur’an.

This can be further explained this way. The abrogation of those recitations was either recommended by the Prophet (‘s) himself, or it was done by those who came to power after the Prophet's death. If one says that the Prophet (‘s) himself recommended it, then it is a claim which calls for substantiation.

All Ulama’ are agreed upon the principle that the Qur’an cannot be superseded or abrogated by an isolate report - i.e. a tradition which has been reported singly. The jurists have made this abundantly clear in their works on the principles of jurispru­dence. In fact, Shafi’i and many other scholars go further to say that the Book of God, (i.e. the Qur’an) cannot be superseded or abrogated by even those traditions which have reached con­tinuity and acquired wide spread currency. This has been con­firmed by Ahmed b. Hanbal in one of the two traditions reported by him. Even those who proposed that a continuous and widespread Sunnah may potentially supersede theQur’an, have confirmed that such a situation has in reality never occurred. In view of the foregoing, it is incorrect to ascribe the abrogation to the Prophet (‘s). Even those reports which mention the omissions clearly say that it occurred after the Prophet (‘s).

But if it is proposed that the abrogation was perpetrated by those who assumed leadership after the Prophet (‘s), then that indeed is tampering with the Qur’an. It can safely be asserted that the occurence of Tahrif in the Qur’an is supported by the majority of Sunni Ulama’, because they believe that certain ayahs of the Qur’an were abrogated, in as far as their recitation was concerned, irrespective of whether the law con­tained in that ayah remained in force or not. Interestingly enough, we find certain scholars among them disputing whether a person in the state of janabah can recite those verses whose reading have been reportedly abrogated, or whether a person without wudhu would be permitted to touch the script of such a verse. Some of them have adopted a view that this would not be permissible. Yes, among the Mutazilites, there is a group which believes that an abrogation of recitation never occurred14 .

Is it not surprising to find Sunni Ulama’ disputing the fact that some of them are supporters of Tahrif. Alusi has censured Al-Tabrasi of having falsely accused Hashawiyyah. He wrote: "Not a single scholar among the Sunnis has ever supported that view". Then he proceeds to presume that al-Tabrasi has been insisting on the absence of Tahrif to alleviate the harm done by some Shia scholars who believed to the contrary. All this makes a pathetic reading especially when it is well known that the Shi’a scholars do not subscribe to Tahrif in the Qur’an, while Al-Tabrasi himself has extensively quoted Sayyid Murtadha, enumerating all his arguments in support of the Qur’an's purity.

Notes

1. Sahih, Bukhari v8,p.26.; Sahih, Muslim v5, p.116, without the last sentence "And then, among verses "

2. Al-Itqan, v1, p.101

3. Al-Itqan, v1, p.121

4. Musnad, Ahmed Hanbal, v1, p.48

5. Al-Itqan, V. 2, p. 40-41

6. Al-Itqan, V. 2, p. 40-41

7. Sahih, Muslim v3, p.100

8. Muntakhab Kanzul Ummal, on the margin of Musnad, Ahmad Hanbal v2, p.43

9. Muntakhab Kanzul Ummal, on the margin of Musnad, Ahmad Hanbal v2, p.50

10. Muslim, Sahih, v4, p.168

11. al Itqan, v2, p.42

12. al Itqan, v2, p.42

13. al-Itqan, v1, p.122, 213

14. Al-Ahkam fi Usulil Ahkam, Amedi v3 p.217