______________________________________,
| w w w |\
| || || | || |\
| o_,_7 _|| . _o_7 _|| 4_|_|| o_w_, |\
| ( : / (_) / ( . |\
|______________________________________|\
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Different Arrangements of Quran
A Wahhabi alleged that it is reported in al-Kafi (one of the Shi'ite
Hadith collection) that the Shia Imam said: "No one compiled the Quran
completely except the Imams".
There is no such a tradition in Usul Kafi. I question the validity of the
booklets that have misquoted the traditions. What is written in Usul Kafi
in a tradition is as follows:
I heard Abu Ja'far (AS) saying: "No one (among ordinary people)
claimed that he gathered the Quran completely as it was revealed
except a liar; (since) no one has gathered it and memorized it
completely as revealed by Allah, the Most High, except Ali Ibn
Abi Talib (AS) and the Imams after him (AS)". (Usul al-Kafi, v1,
p228, Hadith #1).
There are two other traditions which I will mention few lines later. The
above tradition does not say Quran is incomplete. Rather it states it is
not completely in the arrangement as it was sent down. The above
tradition is not something new. As a matter of fact, the Quran that we
use which was compiled by the companions is not in the sequence that has
been revealed. In fact, the Sunni scholars confirm that the first Chapter
of Quran which was sent down to the Prophet (PBUH&HF) was Chapter al-Iqra'
(al-Alaq, Ch. 96).
Sunni References:
- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi, v1, p259
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti, v1, p202
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, v10, p417
- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani, v7, p454
As you know the Chapter al-Alaq is not at the beginning of the present
Quran. Also Muslims agree that the verse (5:3) was among one of the
last revealed verses of Quran (but not the very last one), yet it is not
toward the end of the present Quran. This proves that although the Quran
that we have available is complete, it is not in the order that has been
revealed.
I should point out that Imam Ali was not the only one who had a Quran with
different arrangements. According to the authentic Sunni reports, many
companions had different arrangement (sequence) of Quran, one of them was
Abdullah Ibn Masud:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.518
Narrated Shaqiq:
Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza'ir which the Prophet used to recite
in pairs in each Rak'a." Then Abdullah got up and Alqama accompanied
him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him (about those
Suras). He said, "They are twenty Suras that start from the beginning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
of al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn Mas'ud, and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.g. Ha Mim (the Smoke). and
"About what they question one another?" (78.1)
Thus this is nothing exclusive to Imam Ali. I should mention that the
prophet clearly indicated (by Sunni sources) that Abdullah Ibn masud is one
of whom should be trusted on the matter of Quran:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.521
Narrated Masriq:
'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud and said, "I shall
ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet saying, 'Take (learn) the
Quran from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin
Ka'b.' " ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
This man (Abdullah Ibn Masud) not only had a different Quran but also
(based on Sunni sources) he had a different sequence of chapters and
different set of aayaat. He alleged that the present Quran has some extra
words, and he swears in the name of Allah for his claim! (see Sahih al-
Bukhari, Arabic-English version, 6.468, 5.105, 5.85). He also falsely
alleged that the last two chapters of Quran are not Quranic chapters and
they are only some prayers (Du'aa). (see Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English
version, 6.501)
According to the Shia, these allegations by the companions reported in
Sahih al-Bukhari concerning Quran having extra words are FALSE. No single
verse of Quran is extra.
Also it seems that Aisha has a different opinion as to which chapter was
revealed first:
Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.515
Narrated Yusuf bin Mahk:
While I was with Aisha, the mother of the Believers, a person from
^^^^^
Iraq came and asked, "What type of shroud is the best?" 'Aisha said,
"May Allah be merciful to you! What does it matter?" He said, "O
mother of the Believers! Show me (the copy of) your Quran," She said,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Why?" He said, "In order to compile and arrange the Quran according
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
to it, for people recite it with its Surahs not in proper order."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
'Aisha said, "What does it matter which part of it you read first? (Be
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
informed) that the first thing that was revealed thereof was a Sura
^^^^^^^^^^^
from al-Mufassal, and in it was mentioned Paradise and the Fire.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The second tradition in Usul Kafi which has been widely misinterpreted,
states that what has been revealed to Prophet was as much as 17000 verses.
Although this tradition is not rated authentic, there are two
explanations for that. The first possibility mentioned by our scholars
is that, the verses of Quran were originally shorter, and when the
companions compiled the Quran, they appended short verses and thereby
the number of verses reduced without any change to content of Quran.
The second possibility is that which was given by Shaikh Saduq (RA)
who is the number one Shi'a scholar in the field of Hadith:
"We say that so much of revelation has come down which is not
embodied in the present Quran that if it were to be collected, its
extent would undoubtedly be 17000 verses ... Although all of
them were revelation but they (the extra ones) are NOT a part of
Quran. If they would be a part of Quran, it would surely have been
included in the Quran we have."
Shi'i reference: Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh
Saduq, English version, pp 78-79.
The transcript of the Quran that Imam Ali wrote contained commentary
and hermeneutic interpretation (Tafsir and Ta'wil) from the Holy
Prophet some of which had been sent down as revelation but NOT as a
part of the text of Quran. A small amount of such texts can be found in
some traditions in Usul al-Kafi and else. These pieces of information were
Divine commentary of the text of Quran which was revealed along with
Quranic verses but were NOT parts of Quran. Thus the commentary verses
and Quranic verses could sum up to 17000 verses. As Sunnis know, Hadith
Qudsi is also revelation, but they are not a part of Quran. In fact Quran
testifies that anything that Prophet said was revelation. Allah Almighty
said in Quran about Prophet Muhammad that:
"Nor does he (Muhammad) speak out of his desire. It is no less than
a revelation that is revealed." (Quran 53:3-4).
Thus all the speeches of Prophet were revelation, and surely the speeches
of Prophet was not limitted to Quran. It includes interpretation of Quran
(part of which were direct revelation) as well as his Sunnah (part of which
were indirect revelation).
The third tradition in Usul Kafi which is misinterpreted is as follows:
Abu Jafar said: "No one can claim that he completely has the Quran
with its appearance (Dhahir) and its meaning (Batin), except the
executors (Awsiyaa)." (Usul al-Kafi, Tradition #608).
again this tradition is referring to the fact that the commentary of Quran
is missing. Although we have the appearance of Quran, its meaning (i.e.,
divine commentary) is not with it. The traditions refers to the Quran which
was compiled by Imam Ali (AS) which included the commentary.
In a follow up article, I will give some information about the Quran which
was compiled by Imam Ali (AS) which included all the above-mentioned divine
commentaries.
It is necessary to emphasize here that all grand scholars of the Imami Shia
are in agreement that the Quran which is at present among the Muslims is
the very same Quran that was sent down to the Holy Prophet, and that it has
not been altered. Nothing has been added to it, and nothing is missing from
it. The Quran which was compiled by Imam Ali (excluding the commentaries)
and the Quran that is in the hand of people today, are identical in terms
of words and sentences. No word, verse, chapter is missing.
A Wahhabi mentioned that al-Kafi is an authentic book of Hadith for the
Shia, and as such Shia believe that Quran is not complete.
The above conclusion is based on two wrong hypotesis. First what was
mentioned in the book of al-Kafi does not necessarily indicate that Quran
is incomplete (see the above explanation). Second, we do not consider al-
Kafi to be all-authentic book of tradition, nor his auther ever mentioned
such a thing.
It is true that al-Kafi is among the most important Shia collections of
traditions. The traditions of al-Kafi cover all the branches of faith and
ethics, and all the fundamental of fiqh (jurisprudence). It includes more
traditions than all 6 Sunni collections together (provided that if we
remove the repetitions). For instance, al-Kafi has 16121 traditions, while
Sahih al-Bukhari which has many repetition in itself has only 7275
traditions. If we remove the repetitions, al-Kafi has 15176 traditions
while Sahih al-Bukhari will end up with 4000 traditions. The traditions
mentioned here include both Usul al-Kafi and Furu' al-Kafi.
The author of al-Kafi, Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Yaqub al-Kulain al-Razi (d.
329/941), may Allah have mercy upon his soul, is considered to be highly
honest and highly reliable. However, we should emphasize that neither the
traditions are equal in value and significance, nor are the supportive
evidence for the narrations. The authorities of the chain of narrations are
not also equal in terms of reliability and credibility, and one can in NO
way regard them as equally dependable.
A glance at the book entitled "Mir'atul Uqul" (reflection of the minds)
will reveal this very point to the researcher in more detail. "Mir'atul
Uqul" is an explanatory book to al-Kafi written by another great Shia
scholar of Hadith, Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d. 1111/1700) who is among the
most loyal and faithful to the book of al-Kafi. Majlisi has rated some of
the traditions of al-Kafi as WEAK. However, being weak, does not mean the
tradition is forged. If one of the chain of the authorities of a tradition
is missing, then the tradition is weak in Isnad without regard to its content.
In fact, there are a number of traditions in al-Kafi which have one or more
elements from the chain of narrators are missing. As such, all of them are
regarded weak in Isnad. It might also be that a tradition is specific for
a person who reported it from Imam, and may not have meant for the whole
people. This very point is mentioned in Usul al-Kafi itself:
Ibn Abi Ya'fur said, I inquired of Abu Abdillah (AS) about the
different traditions related by those whom we trust and also by those
whom we don't." Hearing this, the Imam (AS) replied: "Whenever you
receive a tradition which is borne out by any verse from the book of
Allah or by a (established) saying of the Prophet (PBUH&HF), then
accept it. Otherwise, the tradition is meant only for the one who has
brought it to you." (Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English version, Tradition
#202)
Shaikh al-Kulaini (RA), the author of al-Kafi, in the introduction of his
book, mentioned the following:
Brother, may Allah lead you to the right path. You ought to
know that it is not for anyone to distinguish the truth in the
conflicting narrations attributed to the Ulama (i.e., Imams),
peace be upon them, except through the standards which were
declared by al-Alim (i.e., the Imam), peace be upon him: "Test
the (conflicting) traditions by the Book of Allah, and that
which agrees with it take it, and that which disagrees with it
reject it..." (Usul al-Kafi, Arabic version, Introduction by al-
Kulaini, v1)
Is there any explanation better than that of the author? He mentioned that
there are some conflicting narrations in his book, al-Kafi. He also mentioned
that we should follow those Hadiths that are in agreement with the Book of
Allah, and leave that which is in clear disagreement with Quran. To prove
this point, al-Kulaini (RA) quoted a part of the Hadith of Ahlul-Bayt (AS)
that, in fact, confirms it as a criterion for the all the followers of
Ahlul-Bayt (AS).
After all, do the opponents of Shi'a expect us to leave what the author of
al-Kafi confirmed in his own book, and to believe their false accusation that
al-Kafi is all-authentic Hadith collection for the Shi'a?
Also a Wahhabi mentioned that in the introduction to the al-Kafi, it is
written that the al-Mahdi has examined the book and said that it is good
for his followers.
There is no such a thing in the introduction written by al-Kulain himself
(who is the author of al-Kafi). This is what another person has mentioned
in his own introduction to introduce al-Kafi and its author, which is
placed before the introduction of the author. Also you did not correctly
mentioned what is attributed to Imam Mahdi (AS). If such report is ever
true, Imam Mahdi (AS) said:
"al-Kafi is sufficient of our Shia (followers)."
There is nothing wrong with this. In fact, as I mentioned, al-Kafi's
traditions cover all the branches of faith and ethics, and all the
fundamentals of fiqh. Imam Mahdi (AS) did NOT say whatever written in it is
correct. Rather he [reportedly] said, it is sufficient, and includes all
what his followers need in terms of the traditions. Again, such tradition
is not mentioned by al-Kulain himself.
al-Kafi means something that is sufficient. It does not mean all its
content are perfectly correct, since the narrators were not perfect.
Actually the reason that the author named his book al-Kafi was explained in
the introduction of the book written by himself. The scholars of his time
asked him to compile a book of traditions which covers all necessary
branches of religion of Islam. He wrote in his introduction that:
... and you complained that there is no book that could cover all the
^^^^^^^^^
branches of the knowledge of religion (Ilm al-Din) to save the seeker
of truth from referring to many books and which could not suffice as a
^^^^^^^
guide and source of spiritual light in the matters of theology and the
traditions of rightly guided Imams, peace be upon them. You expressed
the urgent need of such a book and I hope that the present book would
serve this purpose. (Usul al-Kafi, Arabic-English version,
Introduction by al-Kulaini, part 1, pp 17-18)
al-Kulaini (RA) is not one of the twelve Imams of the Shi'ites. He was only
a Hadith recorder who reported what was conveyed to him through one or more
sources. He never said that he heard from Imam al-Sadiq (AS), and he stated
only a Hadith that came to him through some reporters. Let it be stated
that the tradition of al-Kafi or any other Shia/Sunni book is NOT
acceptable to the Imami Shi'ites if it wants to ever imply the
incompleteness of the Quran. These few traditions are rated weak. Even if
we suppose that they are true, then the extra verses would mean the divine
commentary of Quran which were revealed to the Prophet Muhammad along with
Quran but not as a part of Quran as Shaykh Saduq and other scholars
specified.
So, if one brings a weak tradition from Usul al-Kafi and then misinterpret
the Hadith, it can not represent a belief of the Shia. However, when Sunnis
claim that Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are all-authentic, they will
have a big problem when they reach to those traditions in these books which
allegedly imply the incompleteness of Quran. Do you see the difference, my
friend?
In book, entitled "Science of Hadith" written by Zainul-Abideen Qurbani,
discusses in great detail the traditions in which may imply the
incompleteness of the Quran. Here is one passage from it:
More than 95% of Shia scholars believe that there has been absolutely
no tampering of the Quran and that the Quran we hold in our hands
today is exactly the same Quran that was revealed to Muhammad (saw),
without a single word missing or being extra. To quote the words of
Shia scholars in this regard would require a whole separate treatise.
But we briefly name just a few of them:
Beginning with Shaikh Suduq, whose words we already quoted, to Shaikh
Mofid, Sayyed Murtada, Shaikh Tusi,..., Allamah Hilli, Muqaddas
Aridibili, Khashif al-ghitaa, Shaikh Bahai, Fayz Kashani, Shaikh Hurr
Ameli, Mohaqiq Kurki, Sayyed Mehdi Bahr ul-Uloom, Sayyed Muhammad
Mujahid Tabataba'i, Shaikh Muhammad Husain Ashtiyani, Shaikh Abdullah
Mamqani, Shaikh Javad Balaghi, Sayyed Hibbat al-Din Shahristani,
Sharif Radi, Ibn Idris, Sayyed Mohsin Amin Ameli, Sayyed Abdul-Husain
Sharif al-Din, Sayyed Hadi Milani, Sayyed Muhammad Husain Allamah
Tabataba'i, Sayyed Abul-Ghasim Khoei, Sayyed Muhammad Rada
Golbayegani, Sayyed Shahab al-Din Mar'ashi Najafi, Ruhullah Khomeini,
etc.
The author then goes on to quote several pages of statements by top Shia
scholars about the completeness and perfect authenticity of the Holy Quran.
It is hoped that what was offered on this subject is sufficient for those
who try to find the truth, that the Shia are the true believers in Quran.
It is improper for those who seek the truth to accuse others of something
which they are entirely innocent of.
Wassalam
--------
Some of the references of this article:
- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic English version
- al-Imam al-Sadiq, printed by Dar al-Fikr al-Arabi Egypt
- al-Burhan, by al-Zarkashi
- al-Itqan, by al-Suyuti
- Fathul Bari, by Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani
- Irshad al-sari, by al-Qastalani
- al-Kafi, printed by al-Haidari Printings - Tehran, Iran
- Shi'ite Creed (al-I'tiqadat al-Imamiyyah), by Shaykh Saduq
- Masadir al-Hadith 'Indal Shia al-Imamiyyah", by Muhammad Husain Jalali
- Science of Hadith, by Zainul-Abidin Qurbani
Comments
Post a Comment