The Belief of the Rawafidh (Shia) Regarding the Alteration (Tahrif) of the Quran
The Belief of the Rawafidh Regarding the Alteration of the Quran
Some deceptive hotheads who sell the illusion of the Muslim Ummah’s unity try to give the impression through their rhetoric that the Shia Rawafidh hold the same belief about the Holy Quran as the Ahl al-Sunnah wal-Jama’ah, and that the Rawafidh love the Quran and serve it just as Sunni scholars do. This is an absolute lie and fabrication. What the ignorant common masses believe is a separate topic, but the belief of their religious authorities (Maraji’), scholars, and orators is the exact opposite of the Sunni belief.
There was a consensus and agreement among the early Rafidhi scholars that the Quran which was revealed to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ has been altered and changed. They believe that we now possess its distorted and altered form, and that the original and complete Quran, which was compiled by Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), is kept safe with the Hidden Imam.
Their books are full of such false narrations in which the affirmation of the alteration of the Quran by their Imams is explicitly present, and their reliable scholars have unanimously and openly, without any mincing of words, declared the Quran to be “altered” (Muharraf) and a victim of additions and omissions.
“Outwardly,” only four individuals opposed this consensus. Thus, the great Rafidhi Hadith scholar Husayn Nuri Tabarsi (d. 1320 AH)—whom the Supreme Leader of the Iranian Revolution, Ruhollah Khomeini, honors with titles like “المولى العالم الزاهد العابد الفقيه المحدث الميرزا حسين النوري نور الله مرقده” (Al-Arba’un Hadithan, p. 2), constantly quoting from his books and tirelessly praying for him; who is the author of Mustadrak al-Wasa’il, one of the “Sihah al-Thamaniyah” (the eight most authentic books) of the Shias; and about whom his contemporary Shia religious authority and great Rafidhi scholar Muhammad Husayn Al Kashif al-Ghita went to extremes in praise, saying:
“علامة الفقهاء والمحدثين ، جامع اخبار الأئمة الطاهرين ، حائز علوم الأولين والآخرين ، حجة الله على اليقين ، من عقمت النساء من ان تلد مثله ، وتقاعست أساطين الفضلاء فلا يداني احدٌ فضله ونبله ، التقي الأواه ، المعجب ملائكة السماء بتقواه ، لو تجلى الله لخلقه لقال: هذا نوري، مولانا ثقة الإسلام حسين النوري الطبرسي” (كشف الأستار ص:٢٤٥)
Meaning, if Allah were to manifest Himself to His creation, He would say: This is My light, our Maulana Thiqat al-Islam Husayn al-Nuri al-Tabarsi.
This same Tabarsi wrote a detailed book titled Fasl al-Khitab fi Ithbat Tahrif Kitab Rabb al-Arbab (The Decisive Discourse on Proving the Alteration of the Book of the Lord of Lords) to prove the alteration of the Quran. In it, through the Hadiths of their Imams and the statements of Rafidhi scholars, he proved that the belief in the alteration of the Quran is a unanimously agreed-upon belief among the Shias. This book was printed in Iran in 1298 AH and is still continuously being published.
He divided the book into three introductions and two chapters. In the second introduction, he mentioned the types of changes and alterations in the Quran, and in the third introduction, he mentioned the statements of Shia scholars regarding this issue.
In the first chapter, he mentioned his false arguments regarding the alteration of the Quran, and in the second chapter, he mentioned the arguments of the opponents and refuted them.
Thus, claiming the consensus of Shia scholars on this issue, he writes:
“المقدمة الثالثة في ذكر أقوال علمائنا في تغيير القرآن وعدمه. فاعلم أن لهم في ذلك أقوالاً مشهورها اثنان :
الأول : وقوع التغيير والنقصان فيه.
الثاني : عدم وقوع التغيير والنقصان فيه، وأن جميع ما أنزل الله على رسوله صلى الله عليه وآله هو الموجود بأيدي الناس فيما بين الدفتين وإليه ذهب الصدوق في عقائده، والمرتضى وشيخ الطائفة في التبيان ولم يعرف من القدماء موافق لهم إلا ما حكاه المفيد عن جماعة من أهل الإمامة والظاهر أنه أراد منها الصدوق – إلى أن قال : وممن صرح بهذا القول الشيخ أبو علي الطبرسي في مجمع البيان … وإلى طبقته لم يعرف الخلاف صريحًا إلا من هذه المشايخ الأربعة ، وما حكى عنهم المفيد .
وقال أيضا بعد أن أورد أسماء كثير من علمائهم المتقدمين القائلين بتحريف القرآن الكريم : ومن جميع ما ذكرنا ونقلنا بتتبعي القاصر يمكن دعوى الشهرة العظيمة بين المتقدمين وانحصار المخالف فيهم بأشخاص معينين” (فصل الخطاب ص:٢٦، ٣٣)
The third introduction: Mention of the statements of our scholars regarding the occurrence or non-occurrence of alteration in the Quran. (In this, he listed the names of approximately forty Imams of the Rawafidh before him who explicitly believe in the alteration.)
Know that their famous opinions on this issue are two:
First: That alteration and deficiency have occurred in it.
Second: That no alteration or deficiency has occurred in it, and that whatever Allah Almighty revealed to His Messenger is exactly what is preserved today between the two covers in the hands of the people. This is the stance adopted by Al-Saduq in his ‘Aqa’id’, by Al-Murtadha, and by Shaykh al-Ta’ifa (Tusi) in ‘Al-Tibyan’. It is not known that anyone among the early scholars shared their view, except what ‘Mufid’ has narrated from a group of Imamis, and it is apparent that he meant Al-Saduq himself. (The author later writes): And among those who explicitly stated the non-occurrence of alteration is Shaykh Abu Ali al-Tabarsi, who wrote this in ‘Majma’ al-Bayan’… Up until their era (i.e., the sixth century AH), no explicit disagreement is known other than these aforementioned four Shaykhs, and what ‘Mufid’ has narrated from them.
Furthermore, after mentioning the names of many of his early Rafidhi scholars who believed in the alteration of the Noble Quran, the author added: “From all the aforementioned points and quoted references, in light of my humble research, it can be claimed that among the early scholars, this belief (of the alteration of the Quran) was extremely famous, and its opponents were limited to only a few specific individuals.”
However, even these four have only denied it ostensibly; yet they have gathered such narrations in their books which explicitly prove the belief in the alteration of the Quran, and they did not offer any criticism of them either. Therefore, the denial by them and some other Rafidhi scholars after them will either be construed as Taqiyyah (dissimulation) or will be rejected as a solitary, anomalous (Shaadh) opinion, just as the famous Shia scholar Ni’matullah al-Jaza’iri (d. 1112 AH) writes:
“والظاهر أن هذا القول إنما صدر عنهم لأجل مصالح كثيرة منها : سد باب الطعن عليها بأنه إذا جاز هذا في القرآن فكيف جاز العمل بقواعده وأحكامه مع جواز لحوق التحريف بها” (الأنوار النعمانية ٢/ ٣٥٨)
“And what is apparent is that this statement (i.e., the stance of the non-occurrence of alteration) was issued by those elders keeping in view many benefits, an important one of which was to close the door to objections raised by opponents. Because if the permissibility of alteration and change in the Quran is accepted, then how would it be permissible to act upon its rules and rulings while the possibility of alteration being attached to it exists?”
For example, the most important Rafidhi figure who denied the alteration is “Ibn Babawayh Qummi”, whom they call “Al-Saduq”, and whose statement the Rawafidh constantly quote to deceive Sunnis, saying “Look, our scholars have denied the alteration.” This very Qummi mentions numerous narrations in his books that clearly prove alteration in the Quran.
Accordingly, he has narrated from Jabir in his book ‘Al-Khisal’ (1/174) that he said: I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ saying:
“On the Day of Judgment, three things will come and complain to Allah Almighty: the Quran, the Mosque, and the Ahl al-Bayt. The Quran will say: O my Lord! (حرّفوني) These people altered me and tore me into pieces.”
Similarly, in his book ‘Thawab al-A’mal’ (p. 137), he narrated with his chain from Ja’far al-Sadiq that he said:
“The deeds of the men and women of Quraysh and other tribes are mentioned in Surah Al-Ahzab… The Imam even said: ‘Indeed, Surah Al-Ahzab disgraced the Qurayshi women of Arabia, and this Surah was even longer than Surah Al-Baqarah, but people reduced it and altered it.'”
Similarly, in his book ‘Al-Tawhid’ (pp. 255-270), he mentioned the alleged story attributed to Hazrat Ali that happened with a Zindiq (heretic) who refused to accept Islam under the pretext of “the alteration of the Quran.” In it, the explicitness of the Noble Quran being altered is present.
This is the reason why Rafidhi scholars like Tabarsi, Asadullah Kadhimi, Yusuf Bahrani, and Abu al-Hasan Amili, etc., have refuted this stance of “Saduq” and have declared his statements on this issue as contradictory, inconsistent, and meaningless. (See: Fasl al-Khitab p. 33, 240, Mir’at al-Anwar wa Mishkat al-Asrar p. 49).
The condition of the remaining three figures is also the same, and the Rafidhi scholars themselves have exposed the contradictions and inconsistencies in their statements regarding this issue and rejected them.
Tabarsi has quoted from his Imams and scholars in this book that there are more than two thousand (2000) narrations which prove the alteration and change in the Quran, and he himself has mentioned hundreds of such narrations in this very book.
After that, he compiled one thousand and sixty-two (1062) such narrations from Shia sources, in which it is said regarding various verses of the Quran that they are incorrect and altered, and then he also inserted the “correct” verses from their superstitious books.
Rather, he also mentioned some such Surahs which are circulated in the books of the Shias but are not in the Quran present before us, such as “Surah Al-Wilayah”, etc.
Now, observe the statements of some more Rafidhi scholars who have written that the statements of our Imams regarding the alteration of the Quran are Mutawatir (successively transmitted), the denial of which is equivalent to the denial of consensus, casting doubt on our Hadiths, or denying the core belief of Imamate.
1- Muhammad bin Muhammad al-Nu’man (d. 413 AH), known by the title “Al-Shaykh al-Mufid”, who is the special student of “Ibn Babawayh Qummi” (the author of the second most authentic Shia book Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih), and whom Khomeini declared as “فخر الطائفة وسندها وذخرها وعمادها” (The pride, support, treasure, and pillar of the sect) and “إمام الفقهاء والمتكلمين” (The Imam of jurists and theologians). In fact, Khomeini considered him superior to “Ibn Babawayh Qummi” in the knowledge of Hadiths and narrations.
This very Mufid writes:
“اتفقت الإمامية على وجوب رجعة كثير من الأموات إلى الدنيا قبل يوم القيامة وإن كان بينهم في معنى الرجعة اختلاف، واتفقوا على إطلاق لفظ البداء في وصف الله تعالى وأن ذلك من جهة السمع دون القياس، واتفقوا على أن أئمة الضلال خالفوا في كثير من تأليف القرآن، وعدلوا فيه عن موجب التنزيل وسنة النبي” (أوائل المقالات ص:٤٦)
“The Imamiyyah have agreed upon the necessity of the return of many of the dead to the world before the Day of Judgment, even if there is a difference among them regarding the meaning of the return. And they have agreed that it is permissible to apply the word ‘Badaa’ (alteration of divine will) in describing Allah Almighty, and this belief is based on textual evidence rather than analogy. And they have agreed that the Imams of Misguidance (referring to the noble Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all) greatly opposed the compilation and arrangement of the Quran, and they deviated in it from the requirements of the revelation and the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ.”
He further writes:
“إن الأخبار قد جاءت مستفيضة عن أئمة الهدى من آل محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم باختلاف القرآن وما أحدثه بعض الظالمين فيه من الحذف والنقصان” (أوائل المقالات ص: ٨٠)
“Reports have abundantly come from the Imams of guidance from the family of Muhammad ﷺ regarding the variation in the Quran and the omissions and deficiencies introduced into it by some transgressors.”
2- Mulla Muhammad Taqi Majlisi (d. 1070 AH), the father of the author of Bihar al-Anwar, who was among the great jurists and scholars of the Shias, and about whom Tafrishi writes:
“كان فاضلا عالما محققا متبحرا زاهدا عابدا ثقة متكلما فقيها، وحيد عصره وفريد دهره” (نقد الرجال ١/ ٢٠)
Majlisi, criticizing “Ibn Babawayh Qummi”, writes:
“إنما العجب من المصنف أنه ذكر في رسالته في الاعتقادات أن القرآن الذي نزل به جبرئيل على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وآله هذا القرآن لم يكن زائداً عليه ولا ناقصاً عنه، مع أن الأخبار في طرق العامة والخاصة متواترة بأنه كان زائداً عليه ونقصوا عنه لمصلحة مذهبهم الفاسد” (روضة المتقين ١٠/ ١٩)
“It is surprising of the author that he mentioned in his treatise ‘Al-I’tiqadat’ that the Quran which Gabriel brought down to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, this Quran was neither more than it nor less than it, whereas narrations from the chains of the ‘Ammah and the Khassah (Sunnis and Shias) are Mutawatir that the Quran was more than this, and they reduced it for the benefit of their corrupt religion.”
3- Muhammad Salih Mazandarani (d. 1081 AH), who was a special student and son-in-law of Mulla Baqir Majlisi’s father, Muhammad Taqi Majlisi. He wrote massive commentaries on the most authentic Shia sources, Kulayni’s Al-Kafi and Ibn Babawayh al-Qummi’s Man La Yahduruhu al-Faqih, which are considered highly reliable among the Shias.
Mazandarani writes:
“وإسقاط بعض القرآن وتحريفه ثبت من طرقنا بالتواتر معنىً، كما يظهر لمن تأمل في كتب الأحاديث من أولها إلى آخرها” (شرح الكافي ١١/ ٧٦)
“The dropping of some parts of the Quran and the occurrence of alteration in it is proven from our chains with conceptual succession (Tawatur Ma’nawi), as this becomes clear to the one who reflects upon the books of Hadith from beginning to end.”
4- Mulla Muhsin Faydh Kashani (d. 1091 AH), author of Al-Wafi, one of the authentic Shia sources from the “Sihah al-Thamaniyah”. Khomeini remembers him with titles like “المحقق الجليل، المحدث العارف، من أجلاء الإمامية”, and about whom Al-Hurr al-Amili writes: “He was a distinguished scholar, expert, philosopher, theologian, Hadith scholar, jurist, researcher, poet, man of letters, and possessed excellent authorship.” (Amal al-Amil 2/305)
Kashani has explicitly stated the occurrence of alteration in the Quran, and has quoted many narrations denoting this from the books of those before him. He even made it the title of one of the introductions to his Tafsir, where he said: “المقدمة السادسة في نبذ مما جاء في القرآن وتحريفه وزيادته ونقصه وتأويل ذلك” (The sixth introduction regarding some of what has been reported about the Quran, its alteration, additions, omissions, and its interpretation). Then, under this heading, he inserted many narrations indicating alteration.
After that, he wrote:
“أقول المستفاد من جميع هذه الأخبار وغيرها من الروايات من طريق أهل البيت أن القرآن الذي بين أظهرنا ليس بتمامه كما أنزل على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله بل منه ما هو خلاف ما أنزله الله ومنه ما هو مغير محرف، وأنه قد حذف منه أشياء كثيرة منها اسم علي، وفي كثير من المواضع ومنها: لفظة آل محمد صلى الله عليهم غير مرة، ومنها أسماء المنافقين في مواضعها، ومنها غير ذلك، وأنه ليس أيضًا على الترتيب المرضي عند الله وعند رسوله صلى الله عليه وآله” (الصافي في تفسير القرآن ١/ ٢٤، ٢٥- ٣٢، ٣٣)
“I say: The meaning derived from all these narrations and other reports through the chain of the Ahl al-Bayt is that this Quran present among us is not entirely as it was revealed to Muhammad ﷺ. Rather, some of it is contrary to what Allah revealed, and some of it is changed and altered; and many things have been omitted from it, one of which is the name of ‘Ali’ which was in many places, and among them is the ‘word of the family of Muhammad ﷺ’ which appeared more than once, and among them are the names of the hypocrites in their respective places, and other things besides these. And this Quran is also not in the arrangement that was pleasing to Allah and His Messenger ﷺ.”
5- Muhammad bin Hasan al-Hurr al-Amili (d. 1104 AH), the author of Wasa’il al-Shia, the most important book among the Shia “Sihah al-Thamaniyah”. Regarding this book, Khomeini says: “من أعظم كتب الإمامية، ومدار المذهب ومرجع العلماء والفقهاء” (Al-Arba’un Hadithan p. 144) meaning the foundation of the Imami sect rests upon this book and it is the academic and religious reference for scholars and jurists.
Within this very book, Amili has explicitly mentioned multiple narrations proving the alteration of the Quran and did not offer any criticism against them.
He also writes:
“وقد تواترت الروايات بأنه لم يجمع القرآن كله إلا الأئمة، وأن من ادعى أنه جمعه كله فهو كاذب، وورد النص الصحيح بأن القرآن الذي نزل على محمد كان سبعة عشر ألف آية والموجود الآن نحو الثلث باعتبار العدد.
ويحتمل كون تلك الآيات أطول من الآيات الموجودة ويكون الموجود منه هو العشر أو أقل وتواتر النص بأن المهدي إذا خرج يخرج القرآن بتمامه فينفر أكثر الناس منه ولا يقبله إلا القليل” (الفوائد الطوسية للعاملي ص:٤٨٣)
“Narrations are successively (Mutawatir) proven in this regard that no one compiled the entire Quran except the Imams, and whoever claims that he has compiled the whole Quran is a liar. And an authentic text has been reported that the Quran which was revealed to Muhammad ﷺ consisted of seventeen thousand verses, and what is currently present is approximately one-third in terms of number.
And it is possible that those verses were longer than the existing verses, and what is present of it might be one-tenth or even less. And the text is Mutawatir that when the Mahdi appears, he will bring out the Quran in its entirety, thus most people will be repelled by it and very few will accept it.”
6- Mulla Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d. 1110 AH), who is one of the greatest Hadith scholars of the Rawafidh, and the author of Bihar al-Anwar, an important book among their “Sihah al-Thamaniyah”. Khomeini remembers him with titles like “The Allamah, the Investigating Hadith Scholar, the Great Hadith Scholar, the Magnificent Hadith Scholar, the Shaykh of Hadith Scholars, and the Expert Researcher and the Peerless Hadith Scholar.”
After quoting a narration attributed to Abu Ja’far al-Sadiq which states that “The Quran that Gabriel brought to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ contained seventeen thousand verses,” Mulla Baqir Majlisi writes:
“فالخبر صحيح، ولا يخفى أن هذا الخبر وكثير من الأخبار الصحيحة صريحة في نقص القرآن وتغييره وعندي أن الأخبار في هذا الباب متواترة معنىً، وطرح جميعها يوجب رفع الاعتماد عن الأخبار رأسًا، بل ظني أن الأخبار في هذا الباب لا تقصر عن أخبار الإمامة” (مرآة العقول في شرح أخبار آل الرسول ٢/ ٥٣٦)
“This narration is authentic (Sahih), and it is not hidden that this narration and many other authentic narrations are absolutely explicit regarding the deficiency and alteration of the Quran; and in my view, the Hadiths in this chapter are Mutawatir in meaning. Discarding all of these narrations entirely would necessitate lifting reliance from Hadiths altogether. In fact, my assumption is that the Hadiths in this chapter are not inferior to the Hadiths of Imamate.”
He further writes:
“والأخبار من طريق الخاصة و العامة في النقص و التغيير متواترة، و العقل يحكم بأنه إذ كان القرآن متفرقا منتشرا عند الناس، و تصدي غير المعصوم لجمعه يمتنع عادة أن يكون جمعه كاملا موافقا للواقع، لكن لا ريب في أن الناس مكلفون بالعمل بما في المصاحف و تلاوته حتى يظهر القائم عليه السلام، و هذا معلوم متواتر من طريق أهل البيت عليهم السلام و أكثر أخبار هذا الباب مما يدل على النقص و التغيير “(مرآة العقول ٣/ ٣٢)
“And the narrations from the chains of the Khassah and the ‘Ammah (Shias and Sunnis) regarding the deficiency and change are Mutawatir, and intellect also dictates that since the Quran was scattered and dispersed among the people, and a non-infallible (someone other than the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt) took the responsibility of compiling it, it is customarily impossible for his compilation to be complete and in accordance with reality. But there is no doubt that people are obligated to act upon what is in these Mushafs (copies of the Quran) and to recite it until the Qa’im (Imam Mahdi) peace be upon him appears. And this is known successively (Mutawatir) through the path of the Ahl al-Bayt, peace be upon them, and most of the narrations of this chapter indicate that deficiency and change have occurred in the Quran.”
Similarly, in his book Bihar al-Anwar, he established several chapters to prove alteration in the Quran, and under them, he quoted narrations attributed to their Imams, such as “باب التحريف في الآيات” (The Chapter of Alteration in the Verses) and “باب تأليف القرآن وأنه على غير ما أنزل الله عز وجل” (The Chapter of the Compilation of the Quran and that it is contrary to what Allah Almighty revealed).
7- Ni’matullah al-Jaza’iri (d. 1112 AH), who was among the special students of Mulla Baqir Majlisi and who assisted Majlisi in the compilation of Bihar al-Anwar and Mir’at al-‘Uqul, writes:
“الأخبار مستفيضة، بل متواترة والتي تدل بصريحها على وقوع التحريف في القرآن كلامًا ومادة وإعرابًا” (الأنوار النعمانية:٢/ ٣٥٧)
“The narrations are abundant, rather Mutawatir, which explicitly indicate that alteration has occurred in the Quran in terms of wording (words and sentences), substance, and diacritics (I’rab).”
He further writes:
“وأخبارنا متواترة بوقوع التحريف والسقط منه، بحيث لا يسعنا إنكاره، والعجب العجيب من الصدوق وأمين الإسلام الطبرسي والمرتضى في بعض كتبه كيف أنكروه وزعموا أن ما أنزله الله تعالى هو هذا المكتوب، مع ان فيه رد متواتر الأخبار” (شرح الصحيفة السجادية ص: ٤٣)
“Our narrations are successively proven (Mutawatir) regarding the occurrence of alteration and omission from it, in such a way that it is not possible for us to deny it. And it is extremely astonishing regarding Al-Saduq, Amin al-Islam al-Tabarsi, and Al-Murtadha in some of his books, how they denied it and assumed that what Allah Almighty revealed is this written Quran, whereas this entails the rejection of Mutawatir narrations.”
Similarly, he writes:
“فنقول : روى أصحابنا ومشايخنا في كتب الأصول من الحديث وغيرها أخبارا كثيرة بلغت حد التواتر في أن القرآن قد عرض له التحريف وكثير من النقصان وبعض الزيادة.”(نور البراهين ١ /٥٢٦)
“We say: Our companions and our Mashaykh (elders) have narrated many such Hadiths in the ‘Usooli’ books of Hadith and others, which have reached the level of Tawatur, stating that the Quran has been subjected to alteration, much deficiency, and some addition.”
“إن تسليم تواترها -يعني القراءات السبع- عن الوحي الإلهي، وكون الكل قد نزل به الروح الأمين يفضي إلى طرح الأخبار المستفيضة بل المتواترة الدالة بصريحها على وقوع التحريف في القرآن كلاماً ومادة وإعراباً، مع أن أصحابنا رضوان الله عليهم قد أطبقوا على صحتها والتصديق بها”(الأنوار النعمانية ٢/ ٢٤٦)
“Accepting the successive transmission (Tawatur) of the seven Qira’ats from divine revelation, and believing that the Trustworthy Spirit brought all of this down, necessitates discarding the famous and even Mutawatir narrations that explicitly indicate the occurrence of alteration in the Quran in terms of wording, substance, and diacritics; despite the fact that our companions (may Allah be pleased with them) have agreed upon their authenticity and verification.”
“قد استفاض في الأخبار أن القرآن كما أنزل لم يؤلفه إلا أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام بوصية من النبي” (الأنوار النعمانية٢/ ٢٤٧)
“It has been abundantly reported in the Hadiths that the Quran, as it was revealed, was not compiled by anyone except the Commander of the Faithful (Ali), peace be upon him, upon the testament of the Prophet.”
He further writes:
“فإن قلت كيف جاز القراءة في هذا القرآن مع ما لحقه من التغيير؟؟ قلت قد روي في الأخبار أنهم عليهم السلام أمروا شيعتهم بقراءة هذا الموجود من القرآن في الصلاة وغيرها والعمل بأحكامه حتى يظهر مولانا صاحب الزمان فيرتفع هذا القرآن من أيدي الناس إلى السماء ويخرج القرآن الذي ألفه أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام فيقرى ويعمل بأحكامه”(الأنوار النعمانية ٢/ ٢٤٨)
“So if you say: How is it permissible to recite this Quran despite the changes that have afflicted it?? I would say: It has been narrated in the Hadiths that the Imams, peace be upon them, ordered their Shias to recite this existing Quran in prayers and other occasions and to act upon its rulings, until our Master, the Lord of the Age, appears. Then this Quran will be lifted from the hands of the people to the sky, and the Quran compiled by the Commander of the Faithful, peace be upon him, will be brought out; then it will be recited and its rulings will be acted upon.”
Husayn Tabarsi has quoted from Ni’matullah that the number of Hadiths denoting the alteration of the Quran exceeds two thousand. (Awa’il al-Maqalat p. 98)
8- Abu al-Hasan al-Amili al-Nabati (d. 1138 AH), about whom Nuri Tabarsi says: “أفقه المحدّثين وأكمل الربّانيين الشريف العدل” (Khatimat Mustadrak al-Wasa’il 2/54).
This very Amili writes:
“أعلم أن الحق الذي لا محيص عنه بحسب الأخبار المتواترة الآتية وغيرها أن هذا القرآن الذي في أيدينا قد وقع فيه بعد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم شئ من التغيرات وأسقط الذين جمعوه بعده كثيرا من الكلمات والآيات… وعندي في وضوح صحة هذا القول بعد تتبع الأخبار وتفحص الآثار بحيث يمكن الحكم بكونه من ضروريات مذهب التشيع” (مرآة الأنوار ١/ ٦٢، ٤٩)
“I know that the inescapable truth, according to the Mutawatir narrations to be mentioned ahead and other Hadiths, is that this Quran which is in our hands has undergone some changes after the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, and those who compiled it after him dropped many words and verses… In my view, the authenticity of this statement, after investigating the Hadiths and scrutinizing the reports, is so clear that it can be judged as being among the necessities (undeniable fundamentals) of the Shia sect.”
9- The Rafidhi Hadith scholar and jurist Muhammad Yusuf al-Bahrani (d. 1186 AH), whom Khomeini grants the title of “Eminent Hadith Scholar,” writes:
“أقول :لا يخفى ما في هذه الأخبار من الدلالة الصريحة و المقالة الفصيحة على ما اخترناه و وضوح ما قلناه،و لو تطرّق الطعن إلى هذه الأخبار على كثرتها و انتشارها لأمكن تطرّق الطعن إلى أخبار الشريعة كملا كما لا يخفى إذ الاصول واحدة،و كذا الطرق و الرواة و المشايخ و النقلة . و لعمري،إن القول بعدم التغيير و التبديل لا يخرج عن حسن الظنّ بأئمّة الجور،و أنّهم لم يخونوا في الأمانة الكبرى،مع ظهور خيانتهم في الأمانة الاخرى التي هي أشدّ ضررا على الدين و أحرى على أن هذه الأخبار لا معارض لها كما عرفت سوى مج الدعاوى العارية عن الدليل الذي لا يخرج عن مجرد القيل والقال”( الدرر النجفية ص:٢٩٨)
“I say: The explicit indication and eloquent discourse in these narrations regarding the stance we have chosen is not hidden from anyone, nor is the clarity of what we have said. If objections could be raised against these narrations despite their abundance and widespread nature, then it would be possible to raise objections against the entire narrations of the Sharia, as it is not hidden, because the foundations are the same, and similarly, the chains, narrators, elders, and transmitters are the same.
By my life! The opinion that no change and substitution took place is nothing more than holding a favorable assumption about the ‘tyrannical leaders’, believing that they did not betray the greatest trust, despite the manifestation of their betrayal in the other trust which is more harmful to the religion.
And it is more appropriate to note that these narrations have no contradiction, as you have known, except for hollow claims stripped of evidence that do not go beyond mere hearsay.”
He further writes:
“أن هذه القراءات السبع فضلا عن العشر إن ادعى بعض علمائنا (رضوان الله عليهم) تواترها عن النبي (صلى الله عليه وآله) إلا أن الثابت في أخبارنا – وعليه جملة من أصحابنا – خلافه وإن صرحت أخبارنا بالرخصة لنا في القراءة بها حتى يظهر صاحب الأمر (عجل الله تعالى فرجه). وليس بالبعيد أن هذه القراءة كغيرها من المحدثات في القرآن العزيز، لثبوت التغيير والتبديل فيه عندنا زيادة ونقصانا. وإن كان بعض أصحابنا ادعى الإجماع على نفي الأول، إلا أن في أخبارنا ما يرده، كما أنهم تصرفوا في قوله تعالى في آية الغار لدفع العار عن شيخ الفجار، حيث أن الوارد في أخبارنا أنها نزلت: “… فأنزل الله سكينته على رسوله وأيده بجنود لم تروها… ” فحذفوا لفظ ” رسوله ” وجعلوا محله الضمير. ويقرب بالبال – كما ذكره أيضا بعض علمائنا الأبدال – أن توسيط آية “… إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت… الآية ” في خطاب الأزواج من ذلك القبيل”(الحدائق الناضرة ٢/ ٢٨٩)
“These seven Qira’ats, let alone the ten Qira’ats, even if some of our scholars (may Allah be pleased with them) have claimed their successive transmission from the Prophet ﷺ, what is established in our narrations – and a group of our companions are upon this – is contrary to it, even though our Hadiths have explicitly given us permission to recite with them until the Master of the Affair (may Allah hasten his reappearance) emerges.
And it is not far-fetched that this Qira’at is like other innovations in the Mighty Quran, because of the establishment of change and substitution in it according to us, by way of addition and omission. Even if some of our companions claimed a consensus on negating the former (addition), there is evidence in our narrations that refutes this. Just as they manipulated the statement of Allah Almighty in the ‘Verse of the Cave’ to deflect the shame from the ‘Shaykh of the Sinners’ (referring to Abu Bakr al-Siddiq), since what is reported in our narrations is that it was revealed as: “… فأنزل الله سكينته على رسوله وأيده بجنود لم تروها…”, so they deleted the word “His Messenger” (رسوله) and put a pronoun in its place. And it is close to the mind – as some of our substitute scholars (Abdal) have also mentioned – that the insertion of the verse “… إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس أهل البيت…” within the discourse addressed to the wives is also of this type.”
10- The famous commentator of Nahj al-Balaghah, Mirza Habibullah Khoei (d. 1326 AH), writes:
“و الانصاف أنّ القول بعدم النّقص فيه ممّا يمكن إنكاره بعد ملاحظة الأدلة و الأخبار التي قدّمناها، فانّها قد بلغت حدّ التّواتر”
“In fairness, after observing the evidence and narrations we have presented, it is possible to deny the statement that there is no deficiency in the Quran; because those narrations (proving the alteration) have reached the level of Tawatur.”
11- The famous Rafidhi scholar Adnan Alawi Bahrani (d. 1348 AH), mentioning the reasons for the prohibition of taking evidence from the apparent text of the Quran and acting upon it until an Imam provides clarification and verification, writes:
“الثاني من وجهي المنع وقوع التحريف والتغيير والتبديل كما تواترت أخبار الفريقين واتفقت عليه كلمة المسلمين في العصر الأول…إلى غير ذلك من الأخبار التي لا تحصى كثرة وقد تجاوزت حد التواتر ولا في نقلها كثير فائدة بعد شيوع القول بالتحريف، والتغيير بين الفريقين، وكونه من المسلمات عند الصحابة والتابعين، بل وإجماع الفرقة المحقة، وكونه من ضروريات مذهبهم وبه تظافرت أخبارهم”(مشارق الشموس الدرية ص:١٢٣، ١٢٦)
“The second among the reasons for prohibition is the occurrence of alteration, change, and substitution, as the narrations of both factions (Sunnis and Shias) have successively conveyed and the consensus of Muslims in the first era agreed upon it… (Then after mentioning a few narrations, he writes) and countless other narrations like this which cannot be numbered and have crossed the limit of Tawatur. And there is not much benefit in transmitting them anymore after the statement of alteration and change has become widespread between both factions, and it being among the established facts according to the Companions and Successors, rather even the consensus of the ‘Rightful Sect’ (Shias), and its being from the necessities of their sect, and their narrations abundantly supporting it.”
Qummi, Kulayni, Tabarsi, Mufid, and other authentic scholars of the Rawafidh also believed in the alteration, because they have mentioned many such narrations in their books that clearly prove the belief in the alteration of the Quran, and they did not offer any criticism or objection to them either.
Faydh Kashani writes: “As for the belief of our Mashaykh (may Allah have mercy on them) in this matter, it is apparent from Thiqat al-Islam Muhammad bin Ya’qub al-Kulayni (may his grave be pure) that he believed in the alteration and deficiency in the Quran, because he narrated reports with this meaning in his book ‘Al-Kafi’ and did not object to them, even though he mentioned at the beginning of the book that he relied upon the things he narrated.
Similarly, his teacher Ali bin Ibrahim al-Qummi (may Allah have mercy on him), whose Tafsir is full of this and in which he resorted to extremism.
And similarly, Shaykh Ahmad bin Abi Talib al-Tabarsi (may Allah be pleased with him), because he too followed in their footsteps in the book ‘Al-Ihtijaj’.” (Tafsir al-Safi 1/52)
Mulla Baqir Majlisi writes: “It is the stance of Kulayni, Shaykh Mufid (may Allah sanctify their souls), and a group that the complete Quran is with the Imams (peace be upon them), and what is in the Mushafs is a part of it. The Commander of the Faithful (blessings of Allah be upon him) compiled it after the Messenger of Allah ﷺ exactly as it was revealed, and presented it to the hypocrite Companions but they did not accept it, and those people intended to compile it during the eras of Umar and Uthman.” (Mir’at al-‘Uqul 3/31)
Yusuf al-Bahrani writes: “Our companions (may Allah be pleased with them) have differed regarding the occurrence of deficiency, substitution, and change in the Quran.
…A group has believed in its occurrence, and this is what the honorable and reliable Ali bin Ibrahim al-Qummi expressed with certainty in his ‘Tafsir’.
And this is the same stance apparent from his student Kulayni in ‘Al-Kafi’, where he abundantly narrated Hadiths indicating omission and deficiency, and neither refuted them nor attempted to reinterpret them.
And this is the same stance apparent from the honorable and reliable Ahmad bin Ali bin Abi Talib al-Tabarsi due to adopting the aforementioned approach in ‘Al-Ihtijaj’.
And this is also what is preferred in my view. Our upright Shaykh of Hadith, Shaykh Abdullah bin Salih al-Bahrani, also adopted this stance with conviction and certainty in ‘Munyat al-Mumarisin fi Ajwibat al-Shaykh Yasin’. And this is what our Shaykh, the Mufid of the rightful sect and the head of the truthful nation (Shaykh Mufid), adopted in ‘Ajwibat al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyyah’.” (Al-Durar al-Najafiyyah 4/65)
The well-known Shia scholar Syed Tayyab al-Jaza’iri writes: “…It is apparent from the statements of the early and later scholars and Hadith experts that they believe in the deficiency of the Quran, such as Kulayni, Barqi, Ayyashi, Nu’mani, Furat bin Ibrahim, Ahmad bin Abi Talib al-Tabarsi (author of Al-Ihtijaj), Al-Majlisi, Al-Sayyid al-Jaza’iri, Al-Hurr al-Amili, Al-Allamah al-Fatuni, and Al-Sayyid al-Bahrani; to establish their sect, they relied upon verses and narrations that cannot be overlooked.” (Muqaddimat Tafsir al-Qummi by al-Jaza’iri 1/23)
The early Shia scholars also fully contributed to the dissemination of this false belief, sometimes openly and sometimes by mentioning “narrations proving the alteration of the Quran” in their books without any criticism or objection. The very first personality among them is Sulaym bin Qays al-Amiri (d. 90 AH), the author of the book “Abjad al-Shia”, who mentioned this belief in his book “Al-Thaqifah”, which is among the most relied-upon books according to Kulayni, Saduq, and others.
Similarly, Fadhl bin Shadhan al-Nayshaburi (d. 260 AH) explicitly stated this belief in his book “Al-Idah”, as did Muhammad bin al-Saffar (d. 290 AH) in “Basa’ir al-Darajat al-Kubra”, the third-century Hijri Shia scholar Furat bin Ibrahim al-Kufi in his “Tafsir”, another scholar of the same century Muhammad bin Nasr Ayyashi in his “Tafsir”, Kulayni’s teacher Ali bin Ibrahim Qummi in his “Tafsir”, Abu al-Hasan Mas’udi (d. 346 AH) in “Ithbat al-Wasiyyah”, Abu al-Qasim Ali al-Kufi (d. 352 AH) in “Al-Isti’anah min Bida’ al-Thalathah”, the fifth-century Rafidhi cleric Muhammad bin Ibrahim Nu’mani in “Kitab al-Ghaybah”, the sixth-century Rafidhi Hadith scholar and jurist Abu Mansur Ahmad Tabarsi in his book “Al-Ihtijaj”, and Ibn Shahr Ashub Mazandarani (d. 588 AH) in “Manaqib Al Ali”.
There are countless other names who hold the belief of the “alteration of the Quran”. I have limited myself to mentioning only a few such statements which explicitly state that the narrations of the “Rafidhi Imams” regarding the alteration of the Quran are abundant and Mutawatir, the denial of which is not possible.
Despite all these evidences, if someone still says that Shias do not hold the belief of the alteration of the Quran, then one should mourn their intellect, but we cannot even do that because they hold a monopoly over that as well.
When almost all the major Imams and scholars of the Shias, the authors of their authentic sources “Sihah al-Thamaniyah”, and their religious authorities explicitly mention this belief in their books, and the isolated ones who outwardly deny it also fill their books with such narrations that clearly prove the alteration, then how can it be said that this is the stance of a few Shias and not all of them!!!
If it is not of all of them, then openly disavow them and declare their disbelief. Look, when the authors of the Sihah al-Thamaniyah—Majlisi, Amili, Tabarsi, Kashani—explicitly state the alteration, and Kulayni, Ibn Babawayh Qummi, and Tusi narrate multiple narrations denoting alteration in their books without denial or refutation, and the Rawafidh consider such people to be the Imams of Imams, the greatest Hadith scholars, and the jurists of the era, and they base their religion on these very books in which this belief is present, then how can they not be believers in it? Is the matter of the alteration of the Quran a subsidiary issue in which there is room for disagreement, or is it an explicit disbelief that takes the believer out of the fold of religion?! But here, instead of disavowing them, the Rawafidh on the contrary praise them and portray them as Imams; Khomeini’s own books are full of their praises.
Even Khomeini’s statements prove the alteration of the Quran. Accordingly, he authenticated a supplication and published it for the masses, which is called “Du’a Sanamay Quraish” (The Supplication of the Two Idols of Quraysh). In this supplication, the two noble Shaykhs, Abu Bakr and Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both), have been abused in every way, their Takfir has been declared, and they have been referred to as the idols of Quraysh. The regrettable part is that this supplication continues to be printed in Shia books in Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, and everywhere else. Its words are as follows:
“اللهم العن صنمي قريش وجبتيها، وطاغوتيها، وإفكيها ، وابنتيهما الذين خالفا أمرك وأنكرا وحيك وجحدا إنعامك وعصيا رسولك، وقلبا دينك، وحرفا كتابك، وأحبا أعدائك، وجحدا آلائك…”
Similarly, he writes: “If the occurrence of alteration is to be accepted, then it happened in verses other than the verses of rulings, which were against their corrupt objectives” (Anwar al-Hidayah 1/247). Establishing this hypothesis and accepting it is also the first step towards proving the alteration.
He also writes:
“ولعل القرآن الذي جمعه – أي علي عليه السلام – وأراد تبليغه إلى الناس بعد رسول الله هو القرآن الكريم مع جميع الخصوصيات الدخيلة في فهمه المضبوطة عنده بتعليم رسول الله، وبالجملة إن رسول الله وان بلغ الأحكام حتى ارش الخدش على الأمة لكن من لم يفت منه شيء من الأحكام وضبط جميعها كتابا وسنة هو أمير المؤمنين في حين فات من القوم كثير منها لقلة اهتمامهم بذلك” (التعادل والترجيح ص:٢٦)
“Perhaps the Quran which Ali (peace be upon him) compiled – and intended to convey to the people after the Messenger of Allah – is the Holy Quran with all those characteristics that are instrumental in its understanding, which were preserved with him through the teaching of the Messenger of Allah. In summary, even though the Messenger of Allah conveyed the rulings to the Ummah, even down to the compensation for a minor scratch, the one who missed none of the rulings and preserved all of them from the Book and the Sunnah is the Commander of the Faithful; whereas a great deal of them was lost by the (other) people due to their lack of attention to that.”
Here, Khomeini, like other Rawafidh, is expressing the belief that the complete Quran was compiled only by Ali.
As he has explicitly stated elsewhere:
“لم يكن أحد حاملا له بظاهره وباطنه إلا هؤلاء الأولياء المرضيين” (شرح دعاء السحر ص:٥٨)
“No one was the bearer of the Quran in its outward and inward aspects (meaning its memorizer and compiler) except these chosen Imams.”
He also writes:
“أولئك – أي الصحابة – الذين لم يكن يهمهم إلا الدنيا والحصول على الحكم دون الإسلام والقرآن والذين اتخذوا القرآن مجرد ذريعة لتحقيق نواياهم الفاسدة، قد سهل عليهم إخراج تلك الآيات من كتاب الله – أي الدالة على خلافة علي بن أبي طالب عليه السلام – وكذلك تحريف الكتاب السماوي، وإقصاء القرآن عن أنظار الدنيا على وجه دائم، بحيث يبقى هذا العار في حق القرآن والمسلمين إلى يوم القيامة، إن تهمة التحريف التي يوجهونها إلى اليهود والنصارى إنما هي ثابتة عليهم”(كشف الأسرار ص: ١١٤)
“Those people – meaning the Companions – who cared about nothing but the world and obtaining power instead of Islam and the Quran, and who made the Quran merely a tool to fulfill their corrupt intentions, it became very easy for them to remove those verses from the Book of Allah – meaning the verses denoting the Caliphate of Ali bin Abi Talib, peace be upon him – and likewise to alter the heavenly Book, and to permanently banish the Quran from the eyes of the world, so that this shame remains regarding the Quran and Muslims until the Day of Judgment. Indeed, the accusation of alteration that they level against the Jews and Christians is actually proven against themselves.”
He writes with further explicitness:
“فالقرآن الكريم كتاب معرفة الله وطريقة السلوك إليه تعالى حُرّف على أيدي الأصدقاء الجهلة” (بحثا عن نهج الإمام ص:١٤)
“The Holy Quran is the book of the cognition of Allah and the path of traveling toward Him, which has been altered at the hands of ‘ignorant friends’.”
Similarly, in many other places, he has pointed towards alteration, even though he explicitly denied the alteration, but this will be construed as Taqiyyah (dissimulation); because firstly, he himself has “authenticated Du’a Sanamay Quraish”, and secondly, the Rafidhi scholars who openly proclaimed the alteration such as Tabarsi, Majlisi, Kulayni, Amili, Bahrani, Ni’matullah al-Jaza’iri, etc., Khomeini has profusely sung their praises and declared them and their books as the religious authorities of Shiism.
Thirdly: He himself has pointed out in several places that alteration has occurred, as mentioned above.
Written by: Mamoon Rasheed bin Haroon Rasheed Salafi.
