A Study of Sunni and Shii Traditions Concerning Tahrif [of Holy Quran] Part 3

Fasl al-Khitab and Tahrif

Some persons who seem to enjoy misleading people have written that the book Fasl al-khitab by Mirza Muhammad Taqi al-Tabarsi on the topic of tahrif contains traditions on tahrif narrated solely by the Shiah. Mentioning two of the twelve arguments offered by al- Nile which are based on Shii traditions, they ignore his ten other arguments nine of which refer to Sunni traditions54 Here we will mention al-Nuri's arguments one by one.

1. He mentions traditions narrated by the Ahl al-Sunnah and some Shiis prophesying that developments similar to those which took place among the earlier peoples, such as the Israelites, will also take place within the Islamic ummah. In this regard he cites traditions from the, Sihah of the Sunnis, concluding that since scriptural corruption has occurred among the Israelites it has also occurred among the Muslims.

Overlooking the basic weakness of this argument - because that which the traditions imply is developments and trends of a socio-his­torical character, to which the Qur'an also alludes - the thing to be noted is that most of these traditions have been narrated by the Ahl al-Sunnah and some of them by the Shiah.

2. Al-Nuri cites Sunni traditions concerning the compilation of the Qur'an and the fictitious tales related to it -such as the Qur'an's being compiled on the testimony of two witnesses, or the exclusive possession of certain verses by some persons, etc. From these he concludes the absence of tawatur and the possibility of tahrif.

This story of the Qur'an's compilation in this form is something particular to the Ahl al-Sunnah, because the Shi`ah believe that the Qur'an was compiled during the Prophet's lifetime, as pointed out by al-Tabarsi in the preface of his exegesis Majma` al-bayan.

In this argument mentions Sunni traditions concerning those verses and chapters whose reading is said to have been abandoned. Then he refutes the concept of abandonment of reading, observing, "These traditions prove the existence of verses and surahs which were deleted by the caliphs." As can be seen, this argument of al-Nuri is also based on what the Ahl al-Sunnah have narrated.

We also reject the concept of abrogation or abandonment of reading (naskh al-tilawah), and considering that the related traditions are akhbar ahad and incapable of proving anything regarding the Qur'an, it is incumbent upon all Muslims to reject them.

4. Al Nuri mentions changes made in the order of verses and cites the traditions which indicate such changes in the revealed sequence of the verses, or mention different orders in the masahif of the Compan­ions, such as Ubayy, 'Ali (A) and Ibn Mas`ud. He also cites the view held by the Ahl al-Sunnah that the Qur'an has been arranged in accor­dance with the subjective judgement (ijtihad) of the Companions. Here he also cites Shii traditions as evidence.

We believe that the order of the surahs has been changed, but the order of verses has remained unchanged, because some traditions explic­itly mention that the Prophet (S) himself arranged the verses. However, a change in the order of surahs does not amount to tahrif:

5. Al Nuri mentions the differences present in the masahif of the Sahabah concerning certain words, verses and surahs. He then cites traditions from such Sunni sources as al-Durr al-manthar, al-Kashshaf, al­ Itqan and from al-Thalabi, al-Tabari and others, inferring from them the occurrence of tahrif. Here again nearly all of the traditions support­ing this argument are derived from Sunni sources, though some tradi­tions which speak of differences amongst these masahif are derived from Shii sources.

It may be observed concerning these differences that they are shadhdh forms of readings that have been attributed to some Compan­ions. Also, the traditions which indicate the existence of other verses and surahs are all akhbar ahad and so incapable of proving anything regarding the Qur'an.

6. Here Al-Nuri mentions traditions from Sunni sources stating that Ubayy ibn Kaab is the best qari' of the ummah. Then he goes on to quote Sunni traditions concerning his mushaf which claims that it contained something in addition to the contents of the present Qur'an. From this he argues that since the present Qur'an does not contain all that which was present in his mushaf, it implies occurrence of tahrif. Most traditions relating to this argument are from Sunni sources and only few of them are from Shii sources.

However, we reject this argument of his on the same basis as men­tioned above.

7. In this argument he mentions `Uthman's burning of the masahif and unifying the people on a single reading. This is something which the Ahl al-Sunnah as well as the Shiah have narrated. Both of them have also narrated Ibn Masud's criticism of `Uthman in this regard. The author again concludes the occurrence of tahrif from this incident after discussing further details.

Here we point out that `Uthman's act was supported by Imam 'Ali ibn Abi `Falb (A), and the criticism of Ibn Mas'ud has either been false­ly attributed to him or was for some other reason, or was a result of Ibn Mas`ud's ignorance of the extent of divergence of reading amongst the people, as noticed by Hudhayfah.

8. Here al-Nuri mentions traditions and statements from Sunni sources regarding deletions from the Qur'an, like the narration from `Abd Allah ibn `Umar concerning the deletion of verses from the Qur'an and the loss of a large number of them, or the story of Abu Musa al- 'Ash`ari as mentioned in Muslim's Sahih regarding his gathering the qurra' of the Qur'an and his remarks about one of al-Musabbihat, the matter of the so-called surahs of al-Khal and al-Hafd,55 the tradition narrated by al ­Bukhari concerning the inclusion of the phrase `salat al-`asr in the verse 2:238 and such similar instances mentioned about the mushaf of `A'ishah.

He cites al-Bukhari regarding the tahrif of other verses, and mentions the purported inclusion of such phrases as مواسم الحج and إلى أجلٍ مسمى in the verses 2:198 and 4:24 from al-Thalabi, Al-Suyuti, al-Itqan, Malik's al-Muwatta; and al-Raghib al-Isfahani's al-Muhdadardt. That which we said in relation to his argument relating to tradi­tions concerning the abrogation of reading also applies here.

9. Al-Nuri bases this argument on certain Shii traditions in which there is no mention of the Qur'an, or tahrif, or differences of readings, but which state that the names of the Imams (A) had been mentioned in all the heavenly scriptures. From this al-Nuri infers that if the Imams' names were present in earlier scriptures, then their names must also have been mentioned in the Qur'an as well, which is the scripture speci­fied for the Islamic ummah. Since we do not find their names in the Qur'an, it does not imply that they were not mentioned, but rather that they were deleted by interested persons.

We do not accept this argument because its premises are refutable, considering that it is possible that the absence of the mention of the names of the Imams (A) could be due to some reason that we do not know. Apart from this, as mentioned earlier, there are other traditions which explicitly state that the name of 'Ali (A) has not been mentioned in the Qur'an.

10. Al-Nuri cites traditions describing differences of readings, which the Ahl al-Sunnah have narrated in large numbers and have justi­fied them as being in consonance with the tradition that says that the Qur'an was revealed in sab`at ahruf. They accept the validity of the seven readings even though, as pointed out by some of them, the number of these readings exceeds ten. The Shiah have also narrated some of these readings, though most of the related traditions are not sahih, and the few that are sahih are contradicted by such other tradi­tions as إقرأوا كما يقرأ الناس (Read as the people read) and إقرأوا كما عُلِّمتم (Read as you have been taught). Moreover, these traditions are akhbar ahad, while the Qur'an requires tawatur as a proof, and there also exists the probability of their being explanations of the verses.

This and the following argument are based on traditions from Shii sources in which there is a mention of the Qur'an having under­gone tahrif. It may be pointed out that by `tahrif mentioned in these traditions - apart from the fact that most of these traditions have been narrated from al-Sayyari, a ghali, and other daif narrators - is implied semantic alteration not textual alteration, because we have unambiguous, sahih traditions proving this point, among them being the letter of the Imam (A) to Sa'd al-Khayr, cited earlier, which al-Kulayni has men­tioned in Rawdat al-Kafi.

12. Here al-Nuri has collected nearly a thousand Shii traditions concerning specific verses in which tahrif has been alleged.

The following points may be noted in regard to this argument.

More than 320 of these traditions contain in their chains the name of al-Sayyfiri, a ghali, who was cursed by al-Imam al-Sadiq (A) and has been discredited by all the authorities on rijal.

More than 600 of these thousand traditions are repetitions, the only difference between them being that they are derived from different books while their chains of transmission are the same, or that their chains of transmission are different.

As to the traditions which do not fall in the above two categories, we find more than 100 traditions cited from al-Tabarsi's Majma` al­ bayan concerning variant readings. Most of these traditions are common to the Shiah and the Ahl al-Sunnah, for al-Tabarsi often cites traditions from Sunni

narrators such as al-Kisai, Ibn Masud, Al Jahdari, Abu 'Abd al-Rahman, Al Salami, al-Dahhak, Qatadah, Ibn `Umar, Ibn Hijaz, Mujahid, 'Ikrimah, 'Aishah, Ibn Zubayr, Hamzah, Ibn Yamar, Ibn Nuhayk, Sa'id ibn Jubayr,`Umar ibn Qaid and other Sunni personalities.

In view of this, is it possible to affirm tahrif by relying upon the few remaining traditions - whether reported by al-Kulayni or 'Ali ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi - when we already know that the vast majority of Shii 'ulama' believe that the Qur'an has remained secure from tahrif and that it has been proved through tawatur?

Moreover, some of the traditions mentioned by al-Nuri relate to the exposition and sha'n al-nuzal of Quranic verses, as pointed out by al-­Majlisi in his commentary on the Usul Al-Kafi.

As a conclusion to this discussion we may mention what Aqa Buzurg al-Tehrani relates about his teacher, Mirza Husayn al-Nuri. Al­Tehrani says,

I have heard him (al-Nuri) say: "I made a mistake in naming the book and it was more appropriate that it should have been named Fasl fi `adam tahrif al-Kitab because I have proved in it that the scripture of Islam, the Noble Qur'an, as present between the two flaps and in circulation in all parts of the world, is the revelation of God in respect of all its surahs, verses and sentences, and no alteration, change, addition or deletion has taken place in it from the day of its compilation to this day, and its first compilation has reached us through a confirmed tawatur..

However, I was negligent in respect of express­ing this fact in several places in the book in order to avoid becoming a target of criticism and abuse, and I have foolishly expressed the contrary. I was content with an allusion to my belief on page 22, whereas that which was important was achievement of certainty concerning the nonexistence of anything besides the compilation existing between the two flaps, and to this effect I quoted al-Shaykh al-Mufid on page 36.

The certainty as to the non­existence of any remainder can be attained only by refuting the six logical possibilities (about the occurrence of tahrif), because even if one of these possibilities is present in the mind no certainty concerning the nonexistence of a remainder can be attained.

I have left the task of judging whether all these possibilities are refutable or not to the reader who studies with a penetrating eye the indications and supportive evidence mentioned by me in the book. Now if there remains in his mind a doubt about the possibility of some remainder besides the extant Qur'an, he should not extravagantly claim to be certain of its nonexistence.

And if there remains no such doubt, then he has indeed attained certainty, as the popular saying goes, 'There is no town beyond Abadan.' Apart from this, no Shari responsibility devolves upon one in regard to the presence or absence of this certainty, and therefore there is no occasion here for anyone of the two groups to find fault with the other.

Al-Tehrani adds: "This is what I have heard from my teacher him­self, and as to his practice, we saw him give no credence to the contents of the traditions (in this regard); rather he considered them Ahad, incapable of proving anything regarding the Qur'an and worth being discarded.56