Tahreef Al-Qur'an in Shiasm - Abu Jasim vs ShiaMan

[Farid]

Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem,

As we all know, the topic of Tahreef Al-Qur'an is a matter of great significance, since the Qur'an is the greater of the two weighty things. Yet, there is much controversy due to accusations about preservation. Luckily for us all, Abu Jasim and ShiaMan agreed to debate this topic for the benefit of all the forum members.

The rules are standard. There will be no copying/pasting material. I expect both members to be respectful of one another and to answer the questions that are posed directly for the benefit of readers.

A reminder to both members. It is also important to not flood posts with a plethora of arguments, for debates are not won with flooding the opponent with material, but are won when the opponent has the inability to answer a significant directed singular question.

The thread will be limited to one hundred posts only, since as we all know, nobody will read a topic that goes on for more than five pages. After that, the thread will be locked.

Apart from that, Abu Jasim has requested that ShiaMan would start by providing an opening statement.

[ShiaMan]

Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem,

Shias do not believe in the tahreef of the Quran regardless of what you may have heard or read.

The Quran today or to be more specific the Surahs are exactly as they were taught by the Prophet. Caliph Uthman arranged the Surahs in the order of they are today.

The accents (zair, zabar, etc.) were added at a later time to help non-arabs read the Quran more easily.

There is the whole "Imam Ali's" Quran talked about. That is in reference to the detailed tafseer he wrote about each single ayah. It is not a special Quran with extra verses, etc.

Allah himself has taken on the ownership of preventing the quran from tahreef so far be it from anyone to say otherwise. Also, our firm belief is that the Quran was sent to Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the role of the Imams is to protect it from corruption. So it would not make sense for the Shia to believe that the Imams protect the Quran and at the same time believe the Quran has changed.

That is pretty much all I can think of at this time.

Inshallah, I will follow the rules as stated by brother Farid.

Brother Abu Jasim - looking forward to learning from you.

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

As-Salaam wa 'Alleikum wa rahmatullah-i wa barakatuh.

إن الحمدلله نحمده ونستعينه ونستهديه ونستغفره، ونعوذ بالله تعالى من شرور أنفسنا ومن سيئات أعمالنا، من يهده الله فلا مضل له، ومن يضلل فلا هادي له، وأشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له، وأشهد أن محمداً عبده ورسوله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم، وشر الأمور محدثاتها، ومل محدثة بدعة، وكل بدعة ضلالة، وكل ضلالة في النار. أما بعد.

Thank you for accepting the request to debate brother ShiaMan, I hope Allah will show us the truth in this debate, and I ask Allah to make my work only for the sake of getting Ajr and showing the people the truth.

You started by saying:

Shias do not believe in the tahreef of the Quran regardless of what you may have heard or read.

I say: Yes, many normal Shi'i(s) ('Awaam) do not believe in the tahreef (corruption/changing) of the Qur'an, this is because they do not follow the sayings of their scholars and the narrations attributed to the Prophet and Ahl-ul Bayt (A.S), because when we read in the books of the scholars of the Shi'i sect, or Shiasm, we see that they believed in the tahreef (corruption) for various reasons, one reason some scholars believe the Qur'an was corrupted is the name of Imam Ali (R.A) not being mentioned in the Qur'an, this particular reason made the well-known scholar ('Allaama) Adnaan al-Musawy al-Bahrani believe in the tahreef of the Qur'an.

Another reason al-Bahrani believes the Qur'an was mentioned is him reading all the narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt (falsely attributed to them of course) saying that the Qur'an has been corrupted, or changed. (See Mashaariq al-Shumoos al-Duriyya Page 127).

So, most if not all Shi'i scholars say that the Qur'an we have between our hands today isn't the Qur'an that was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) through Archangel Gabriel (رضي الله عنه). We never said that ALL the Shi'a say that the Qur'an was corrupted, we say however, that most if not all scholars believe that the Qur'an we have today has been corrupted, or changed. That's why our scholars do not believe in the kufr (disbelief) of ALL the Shi'a, but in the kufr of the scholars of the Shi'a who say that the Qur'an has been corrupted, or curses the Sahaaba (companions of the Prophet), or worships graves, etc.

------------

You then said:

The Quran today or to be more specific the Surahs are exactly as they were taught by the Prophet. Caliph Uthman arranged the Surahs in the order of they are today.

I say: Beautiful, but it's weird that you say that the Surahs are exactly as they were taught by the Prophet, because the Shi'i narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt say that the Qur'an was collected (جُمِعَ) fully ONLY by Ahl-ul Bayt, and not by Caliph 'Uthmaan (رضي الله عنه) as you say, and believe me I agree with you, but not the most authentic Shi'i book Al-Kafi.

We read in Al-Kafi the following narration(s):

Chapter ‘That No One Collected the Qur’an Fully Except for the Imams (A.S) and that They Know It Fully.’

1- Muhammad Ibn Yahya, from Ahmad Ibn Muhammad, from Ibn Mahbub, from Amr Ibn Abi Miqdam that Jabir said: I heard Abu Ja’afar (A.S) saying: No one claimed from the people that the Qur’an was collected fully except a liar, and no one collected it and preserved it as Allah revealed except for Ali Ibn Abi Talib (A.S) and the Imams after him (A.S).

2- Muhammad Ibn al-Hussain, from Muhammad Ibn al-Hassan, from Muhammad Ibn Sannan, from Ammar Ibn Marwan, from al-Munkhil, form Jabir, from Abu Ja’afar (A.S) that he said: No one can claim that he has the Qur’an fully both externally and fully except for the Awsiyaa’.

Source: Al-Kafi Vol. 1 Page 228 Chapter ‘That No One Collected the Qur’an Fully Except for the Imams (A.S) and that They Know It Fully.’

So Ahl-ul Bayt (A.S) tell us that no one has the Qur'an fully both externally and internally (ظاهري وباطني) except for them, and no one collected it fully except for Imam Ali (رضي الله عنه), and not the Caliph 'Uthmaan (رضي الله عنه) as you said.

Now this narration tells us two things:

1- You said that the Caliph 'Uthmaan collected the Qur'an fully and this is what Shi'a believe, however, this is not the belief of Ahl-ul Bayt, and this was revealed after reading Al-Kafi, the most authentic book of the Shi'i sect.

2- The Qur'an was only collected by Ahl-ul Bayt, or Ali in particular, right? I mean this is what the narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt tell us! Now what I want from you my dear brother ShiaMan is to give me a full chain of narration to Imam Ali for the Qur'an.

------------

You also said:

The accents (zair, zabar, etc.) were added at a later time to help non-arabs read the Quran more easily.

I say: Do you mean the readings? If so, then Ahlus-Sunnah believe that the readings are from Allah and the Qur'an was written in these seven readings.

We read in Sahih al-Bukhari the following narration:

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Gabriel read the Qur'an to me in one way (i.e. dialect) and I continued asking him to read it in different ways till he read it in seven different ways."

Source: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith #3219.

------------

You then said the following:

There is the whole "Imam Ali's" Quran talked about. That is in reference to the detailed tafseer he wrote about each single ayah. It is not a special Quran with extra verses, etc.

I say: Yes, there is an Imam Ali's Qur'an, it is the Qur'an collected fully by him as mentioned previously in Al-Kafi, and we talked about it in detail.

We read in Al-Kafi:

1- Muhammad Ibn Yahya, from Ahmad Ibn Muhammad, from Ibn Mahbub, from Amr Ibn Abi Miqdam that Jabir said: I heard Abu Ja’afar (A.S) saying: No one claimed from the people that the Qur’an was collected fully except a liar, and no one collected it and preserved it as Allah revealed except for Ali Ibn Abi Talib (A.S) and the Imams after him (A.S).

Source: Al-Kafi Vol. 1 Page 228 Chapter ‘That No One Collected the Qur’an Fully Except for the Imams (A.S) and that They Know It Fully.’

------------

You finally said:

Allah himself has taken on the ownership of preventing the quran from tahreef so far be it from anyone to say otherwise. Also, our firm belief is that the Quran was sent to Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the role of the Imams is to protect it from corruption. So it would not make sense for the Shia to believe that the Imams protect the Quran and at the same time believe the Quran has changed.

I say: Yes, Allah said in the Qur'an:

{ Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. } [Qur'an Surah al-Hijr Verse 9]

You said a beautiful thing, you said:

so far be it from anyone to say otherwise

So you of course believe the Qur'an wasn't corrupted or hasn't been changed because Allah said so, right? What if someone did say that the Qur'an was changed or has been corrupted, a Shi'i scholar, regardless of the person, is he a Kaafir (disbeliever)?

Now before you tell me what Ahlus-Sunnah think, yes, anyone who claims there are verses removed from the book of Allah (the Qur'an), is a Kaafir, regardless of who he is.

Then you said something I didn't like very much and didn't think it was beautiful, you said:

Also, our firm belief is that the Quran was sent to Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the role of the Imams is to protect it from corruption.

Re-read the verse we all memorised ever since we were kids, that is:

{ Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. } [Qur'an Surah al-Hijr Verse 9]

Notice what Allah said, He said We will be its guardian, NOT We and the Imams. So this belief is awful, it is kufr (disbelief)!

------------

هذا وصلى الله وسلم على نبينا محمد وعلى آله وصحبه أجمعين.

Looking forward to your reply brother ShiaMan and your rebuttals. Also, I am looking forward into discussing the sayings of the Shi'i scholars regarding this issue and showing their belief in the corruption of the Qur'an.

Also, I have a really important thing to say, starting next week I will be very busy for a month or so, it might take me weeks to respond, please bare with me brother ShiaMan and fellow administrators, I will respond to everything he'll say, but not very quickly. Thank you.

- Abu Jasim Al-Salafi

[ShiaMan]

As-Salaam wa 'Alleikum wa rahmatullah-i wa barakatuh.

إن الحمدلله نحمده ونستعينه ونستهديه ونستغفره، ونعوذ بالله تعالى من شرور أنفسنا ومن سيئات أعمالنا، من يهده الله فلا مضل له، ومن يضلل فلا هادي له، وأشهد أن لا إله إلا الله وحده لا شريك له، وأشهد أن محمداً عبده ورسوله صلى الله عليه وعلى آله وسلم، وشر الأمور محدثاتها، ومل محدثة بدعة، وكل بدعة ضلالة، وكل ضلالة في النار. أما بعد.

Thank you for accepting the request to debate brother ShiaMan, I hope Allah will show us the truth in this debate, and I ask Allah to make my work only for the sake of getting Ajr and showing the people the truth.

Wa alai kum salaam and thank you too.

You started by saying:

Shias do not believe in the tahreef of the Quran regardless of what you may have heard or read.

I say: Yes, many normal Shi'i(s) ('Awaam) do not believe in the tahreef (corruption/changing) of the Qur'an, this is because they do not follow the sayings of their scholars and the narrations attributed to the Prophet and Ahl-ul Bayt (A.S), because when we read in the books of the scholars of the Shi'i sect, or Shiasm, we see that they believed in the tahreef (corruption) for various reasons, one reason some scholars believe the Qur'an was corrupted is the name of Imam Ali (R.A) not being mentioned in the Qur'an, this particular reason made the well-known scholar ('Allaama) Adnaan al-Musawy al-Bahrani believe in the tahreef of the Qur'an.

Another reason al-Bahrani believes the Qur'an was mentioned is him reading all the narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt (falsely attributed to them of course) saying that the Qur'an has been corrupted, or changed. (See Mashaariq al-Shumoos al-Duriyya Page 127).

So, most if not all Shi'i scholars say that the Qur'an we have between our hands today isn't the Qur'an that was revealed to the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) through Archangel Gabriel (رضي الله عنه). We never said that ALL the Shi'a say that the Qur'an was corrupted, we say however, that most if not all scholars believe that the Qur'an we have today has been corrupted, or changed. That's why our scholars do not believe in the kufr (disbelief) of ALL the Shi'a, but in the kufr of the scholars of the Shi'a who say that the Qur'an has been corrupted, or curses the Sahaaba (companions of the Prophet), or worships graves, etc.

------------

Dear brother - first and foremost, I will admit that I do not know of Al-Bahrani. As a matter of fact when I did a search of "Mashaariq al-Shumoos al-Duriyya", google pointed me back to this site to your post made on April 7 2016.  So he and his book hardly constitute as mainstream or majority. If we want to discuss mainstream, then please find me references from Sistani, Bashir Al-Najafi or their likes. There are more than 50 marajae today so anything from any of them might be worth discussing.
The best reference I can provide is a chapter in the book Al-Bayan by Al-Khoie who goes into detail about this.
https://www.al-islam.org/al-bayan-fi-tafsir-al-quran-prolegomena-quran-ayatullah-sayyid-abulqasim-al-khui/7-protection-quran
The entire book is a great read.
Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi calls out for all Muslims to wage war against the West. We speak out and say that a small group of people (less than 1%) do not speak for all Muslims.
Similarly, Al-Bahrani (whoever he is) does not speak for all shias but for whoever is dumb enough to follow him.

You then said:

The Quran today or to be more specific the Surahs are exactly as they were taught by the Prophet. Caliph Uthman arranged the Surahs in the order of they are today.

I say: Beautiful, but it's weird that you say that the Surahs are exactly as they were taught by the Prophet, because the Shi'i narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt say that the Qur'an was collected (جُمِعَ) fully ONLY by Ahl-ul Bayt, and not by Caliph 'Uthmaan (رضي الله عنه) as you say, and believe me I agree with you, but not the most authentic Shi'i book Al-Kafi.

We read in Al-Kafi the following narration(s):

Chapter ‘That No One Collected the Qur’an Fully Except for the Imams (A.S) and that They Know It Fully.’

1- Muhammad Ibn Yahya, from Ahmad Ibn Muhammad, from Ibn Mahbub, from Amr Ibn Abi Miqdam that Jabir said: I heard Abu Ja’afar (A.S) saying: No one claimed from the people that the Qur’an was collected fully except a liar, and no one collected it and preserved it as Allah revealed except for Ali Ibn Abi Talib (A.S) and the Imams after him (A.S).

2- Muhammad Ibn al-Hussain, from Muhammad Ibn al-Hassan, from Muhammad Ibn Sannan, from Ammar Ibn Marwan, from al-Munkhil, form Jabir, from Abu Ja’afar (A.S) that he said: No one can claim that he has the Qur’an fully both externally and fully except for the Awsiyaa’.

Source: Al-Kafi Vol. 1 Page 228 Chapter ‘That No One Collected the Qur’an Fully Except for the Imams (A.S) and that They Know It Fully.’

So Ahl-ul Bayt (A.S) tell us that no one has the Qur'an fully both externally and internally (ظاهري وباطني) except for them, and no one collected it fully except for Imam Ali (رضي الله عنه), and not the Caliph 'Uthmaan (رضي الله عنه) as you said.

Now this narration tells us two things:

1- You said that the Caliph 'Uthmaan collected the Qur'an fully and this is what Shi'a believe, however, this is not the belief of Ahl-ul Bayt, and this was revealed after reading Al-Kafi, the most authentic book of the Shi'i sect.

2- The Qur'an was only collected by Ahl-ul Bayt, or Ali in particular, right? I mean this is what the narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt tell us! Now what I want from you my dear brother ShiaMan is to give me a full chain of narration to Imam Ali for the Qur'an.

------------

Brother - I did not say Caliph Uthman collected the quran fully. I said he arranged it in order we find it today. Big difference. Organizing the Quran is longest Surah to shortest and collecting the quran are completely different.

Bilal Philips writes that the Quran continued to be read according to the seven ahruf until midway through Caliph 'Uthman's rule when some confusion arose in the outlying provinces concerning the Quran's recitation. Some Arab tribes had begun to boast about the superiority of their ahruf and a rivalry began to develop. At the same time, some new Muslims also began mixing the various forms of recitation out of ignorance. Caliph 'Uthman decided to make official copies of the Quran according to the writing conventions of the Quraysh and send them along with the Quranic reciters to the major centres of Islam. This decision was approved by Sahaabah and all unofficial copies of the Quran were destroyed. Uthman burned the unofficial copies of the Quran. Following the distribution of the official copies, all the other ahruf were dropped and the Quran began to be read in only one harf. Thus, the Quran which is available throughout the world today is written and recited only according to the harf of Quraysh

Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips, Tafseer Soorah Al-Hujuraat, 1990, Tawheed Publications, Riyadh, p. 28-29

You also said:

The accents (zair, zabar, etc.) were added at a later time to help non-arabs read the Quran more easily.

I say: Do you mean the readings? If so, then Ahlus-Sunnah believe that the readings are from Allah and the Qur'an was written in these seven readings.

We read in Sahih al-Bukhari the following narration:

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Gabriel read the Qur'an to me in one way (i.e. dialect) and I continued asking him to read it in different ways till he read it in seven different ways."

Source: Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith #3219.

------------

No brother, I am not referring to the harf but to the diacritic marks

You finally said:

Allah himself has taken on the ownership of preventing the quran from tahreef so far be it from anyone to say otherwise. Also, our firm belief is that the Quran was sent to Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the role of the Imams is to protect it from corruption. So it would not make sense for the Shia to believe that the Imams protect the Quran and at the same time believe the Quran has changed.

So you of course believe the Qur'an wasn't corrupted or hasn't been changed because Allah said so, right? What if someone did say that the Qur'an was changed or has been corrupted, a Shi'i scholar, regardless of the person, is he a Kaafir (disbeliever)?

Now before you tell me what Ahlus-Sunnah think, yes, anyone who claims there are verses removed from the book of Allah (the Qur'an), is a Kaafir, regardless of who he is.

To quote the reference I gave earlier: "Thus, anyone who explains the Qur'an incorrectly, ascribing to it meanings other than those it conveys, has committed an alteration. One can find many followers of the sinful deviations and corrupt doctrines, who have changed the meaning of the Qur'an by interpreting its verses in accordance with their own opinions and their heretic tendencies.

There are prophetic statements prohibiting such alteration of the meanings, and the doer of these alterations has been condemned in a number of traditions."

But I hold back from calling them kaafir or doing takfir on them. Let me ask you this question. There are plenty of Muslim women who do not do hijab and even say they do not agree with it even though it is written in the Quran. Are they kafir? Denying something that is in the Quran - I am not sure if that is disbelief or disobedience.

Kafir = rejecting "there is no God but Allah" and/or rejecting "Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah"
Denying the perfection of the Quran or denying hijab, etc. is disobedience and not kufr. This is my opinion and may ben different from the opinion of Shia Scholars and Sunni scholars.

Then you said something I didn't like very much and didn't think it was beautiful, you said:

Also, our firm belief is that the Quran was sent to Prophet Muhammad (saw) and the role of the Imams is to protect it from corruption.

Re-read the verse we all memorised ever since we were kids, that is:

{ Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. } [Qur'an Surah al-Hijr Verse 9]

Notice what Allah said, He said We will be its guardian, NOT We and the Imams. So this belief is awful, it is kufr (disbelief)!

------------

Perhaps the wrong choice of words by me or I failed to explain clearly.

No doubt the guardianship of the Quran is with Allah. But how does that help come?

Let me explain by example.

[Quran 93:6] Did He not find you an orphan and give you shelter?

Will anyone deny that Allah gave shelter to the Prophet? No
Will anyone deny that the shelter was in Abu Talib's house? No
So if I say that Abu Talib gave shelter to the Prophet - I am merely stating a fact and in no way denying the true help was from Allah alone.

Similarly, the true and only guardianship of the Quran is with Allah. But saying that the Imams are there to protect the Quran does not mean I am replacing Allah Guardianship with theirs. All it means is that they are Allah's Choice or method of protection for His Word.

I hope this explains the context of my comments.

Looking forward to your reply brother ShiaMan and your rebuttals. Also, I am looking forward into discussing the sayings of the Shi'i scholars regarding this issue and showing their belief in the corruption of the Qur'an.

Also, I have a really important thing to say, starting next week I will be very busy for a month or so, it might take me weeks to respond, please bare with me brother ShiaMan and fellow administrators, I will respond to everything he'll say, but not very quickly. Thank you.

- Abu Jasim Al-Salafi

Thank you and please take your time. My responses too may not be immediate but I will comment.

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

Dear brother - first and foremost, I will admit that I do not know of Al-Bahrani. As a matter of fact when I did a search of "Mashaariq al-Shumoos al-Duriyya", google pointed me back to this site to your post made on April 7 2016.  So he and his book hardly constitute as mainstream or majority.

Wow, you are here to debate Ahlus-Sunnah regarding the issue of tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an in your madhhab and you do not know your scholars?? You make me laugh ShiaMan.

Al-Bahrani is a VERY well-known scholar, and how do you search for a book? You ask your scholars, Al-Kurani, Sistani, etc. about this book (مشارق الشموس الدرية) and Al-Bahrani, and let's see if he's known or not

Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi calls out for all Muslims to wage war against the West. We speak out and say that a small group of people (less than 1%) do not speak for all Muslims.
Similarly, Al-Bahrani (whoever he is) does not speak for all shias but for whoever is dumb enough to follow him.

So you're saying Al-Bahrani does not speak for all Shi'as? Ok, what about Nematullah al-Jazairi, al-Majlisi, Faiz Kashani, Ali Ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi, Sheikh Mufid, al-Kulaini, and others. Aren't these VERY well-known scholars enough for you and enough to speak for all Shi'as?

Let's start with Nematullah al-Jazairi, he says in Nur-ul Baraheen (نور البراهين) p.526 the following:

“Our companions and sheikhs narrated in books of usool and others many narrations, reaching level of tawatur,  that in Quran occurred tahrif, and many deletions,  and some additions”.

------

He also said in Nurul Anwar fi sharhil Sahifa as-Sajadiyah (نور الأنوار في شرح الصحيفة الساجدية) p.63 the following:

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

Translation: “And our traditions that tahrif and fallout (of verses) happened in the Quran are mutawatir, so we can’t deny them. And strange, strange how is that Saduq, Ameen of Islam at-Tabarsi and al-Murtada in some of their books rejected it, and claimed that what was revealed by Allah, that is this (what) is recorded (in present Quran), in this (stance) is rejection of mutawatir narrations”.

------

Al-Sayid Ali Al-Faani Al-Asfahani said in Araa’ Hawla Al-Quran (Views surrounding the Quran) p. 88:

Question 5: Who are those who view [that the Quran was subject to] Tahreef (i.e. alteration), and what is their evidence?

Answer: The Answer [is] that a number of Muhaditheen (narrators) and memorizers of traditions deduced from narrations that [the Quran was subject to] Alteration by deductions [made from it]. For that reason they adopted that [the Quran] was subject to Tahreef (alteration) by deducting [from it].

The first from among them, in what I know, is Ali ibn Ibrahim in his Tafseer. Since it was mentioned in it: Abu Al-Hasan Ali Ibn Ibrahim Al-Hashimi Al-Qumi said:

“From the Quran is Nasikh and Mansoukh (i.e. Abrogated verses and Abrogating verses) … and from it is a letter [placed] in place of another, and from it is what was Muharaf (altered), and from it is contrary to what Allah -Exalted is He- has revealed” … until he said … “As for what is Altered (Muharaf) from it is like His saying: {But Allah bears witness to that which He has revealed to you} about Ali, that is how it was revealed {… He has sent it down with His knowledge, and the angels bear witness [as well]}[Al-Nisaa 166], and His saying: {O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord …} about Ali {… and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message} [Al-Maeda 67]*. And His saying: {Indeed, those who disbelieve and commit wrong [or injustice] …} [in regards to] the rights of the Household of Mohammed {… – never will Allah forgive them, nor will He guide them to a path} [Al-Nisaa 168]**. {And those who have wronged …} the Household of Mohammed their rights {… are going to know to what [kind of] return they will be returned} [Al-shu’araa 227]. And His saying:{And if you could but see} those who have wronged Mohammed’s household their rights {are in the overwhelming pangs of death} [Al-Anaam 93], and from these are plenty which we will mention in its location [1]. What was intended from his speech has been complete.

That (i.e. that view of Tahreef) also appears from Al-Kulayni where he narrates traditions apparent in that and does not comment on it. Al-Sayid Al-Jazae’iri also goes to [that view of] Tahreef in his explanations on the two Tahzeebs, and has mentioned an elongated research on that matter in a Treatise which he named -Manbaa’ Al-Haya-”

* Original Arabic refers this verse to Al-Maeda 70, which is incorrect

** He refers the verse to Al-Nisaa 167, which is another mistake.

[1] Tafseer Al-Qumi Volume 1 page 9, 10, & 11.

------

Ayatulah ‘Ali al-Milani also admits that Sayyed Ni’imatulah al-Jazaeri used to believe in Tahreef:

When asked if al-Kulayni, al-‘Ayyashi, al-Majlisi, al-Qummi believed in Tahreef the Ayatullah replied:

“In the Name of Allah, al-Salamu ‘Aleykum, we mentioned in the book “al-Tahqiq fi Nafi al-Tahreef” that it is unacceptable to attribute the belief in Tahreef to al-Qummi, al-Kulayni, al-‘Ayyashi or al-Majlisi. However al-Jazaeri does believe it.”

Fatwa Link: http://www.al-milani.com/qa/qa.php?cat=10051&itemid=236

------

Sayyed Ni'imatullah al-Jazairi also said in Al-Anwar Al-Nu’maniya (Al-anwaar Al-nu’maniyyah) p.2/357-358:

“Thirdly: To accept that it (i.e. the Quran) has been [authentically] transmitted [in the way of] tawatur from Divine Revelation and that all [what is in it] was revealed by Al-Rooh Al-Ameen (i.e. Jibreal [‘Alaihi Al-Salam]) would lead to discarding the multitude of reports, rather those [reports] which arrived to us through tawatur, and [which] clearly indicate the occurrence of Tahreef in the Quran in Words, material, and grammar. Our companions May Allah be pleased with them have even firmly agreed to [the] authenticity [of these reports] and believed in it
Yes, Al-Murtada, Al-Saduq, and Al-Shaykh At-Tabrasi disputed in this and ruled that everything between the two covers of the Mushaf is a revealed Quran and nothing else, and [that] it was neither subject to any Tahreef or Tabdeel.
[That is how] our Shaykh at-Tabrasi was able to specify the verses of the Quran and [number of] its chapters; He narrated from the Prophet [Prayers of Allah on him and his household] that the Surahs of the Quran are 114 Surahs, and that the number of verses is 6,236 verse; and that its letters are 321,250 letters.
What appears though, is that [they went to] this view of theirs due to many benefits [they saw], such as blocking the door to attacking it (i.e. the mazhab). Since if such a thing (i.e. Tahreef) was permissible in the Quran then how can one act upon its principles and rulings, while it is subject to Tahreef[?]
We will get to the answer of this [soon].
How when those Nobles narrated in their books many narrations …

------

Now let's see what al-Majlisi thinks of the Qur'an.

Ayatollah Ali al-Milani kept silence when someone said Majlisi belived in tahrif!

Question 4: Is it true the saying of Shaykh Mufid, and Abul Hasan al-Amili, and Sayyid Ni’matullah al-Jazairi and Majlisi and others- in spite of their virtues and high position- that there was Tahreef in the Quran?

Answer 4: We do not deny the existence of a very few from among our Muhaddethin about the deletion of the Holy Quran, and this saying is refuted but it is not allowed for us to disassociate ourselves from them.

As you can see this Ayatollah didn’t deny that above mentioned scholars did believe in Tahrif.

Screen-cap of the Fatwa: https://gift2shias.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/milanianswerka7.jpg

------

Tayeeb Musawi al-Jazairi’s testimony that Majlisi did believe in tahrif!

Shi'a shaykh Sayed Tayeeb Mosawi al-Jazairi in his saying on commentary of Qummi, wrote:

ولكن الظاهر من كلمات غيرهم من العلماء والمحدثين المتقدمين منهم والمتأخرين القول بالنقيصة كالكليني والبرقى، والعياشي والنعماني، وفرات بن ابراهيم، واحمد بن ابى طالب الطبرسي صاحب الاحتجاج والمجلسى، والسيد الجزائري، والحر العاملي، والعلامة الفتوني، والسيد البحراني وقد تمسكوا في اثبات مذهبهم بالآيات والروايات التى لا يمكن الاغماض عنها والذي يهون الخطب ان التحريف اللازم على قولهم يسير جدا مخصوص بآيات الولاية.


“and what is obvious from the words of those other than them, from the early and later scholars of hadith, is the proponence of [the belief in] omission.  Such as: al-Kulayni, al-Barqi, al-Ayashi, an-Nomani, and Furat ibn Ibrahim (al-Koofe), Ahmad ibn Abu Talib a-Tabrasi author of “al-Ihtijaj”, al-Majlisi, sayed Jazairi, al-Hurr al-Amili, allama al-Fattuni, sayed al-Bahrani. They have held on tightly to the verses and narrations, that cannot possibly be looked away from, to establish their opinion.  The thing that makes disaster less than it is, they said tahrif happened in very small proportion, only in verses on wilayat”.

------

Majlisi cleary admitted that he believe in tahrif!

In his book “Miratul uqul” he said (3/31):

و الأخبار 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 و سيأتي كثير منها في الأبواب‏

” and traditions from the ways of the elite (i.e Shia) and the public (i.e Sunnah) regarding omission and change are numerous (mutawatir), and logic dictates that if the Quran was separated and spread amongst people, then if a fallible has tried to collect it, then it is highly unlikely that its collection would be complete and in compliance with reality. However, there is no doubt that people are obliged to work with what is included in the Mushaf(s) and to read it until Al-Qa'im appears, and this is known through numerous traditions (mutawatir) from the way of Ahl-ul Bayt and most traditions relating to this topic point to omission and change, and many of it will be related in the chapters………..”

------

Majlisi, Muhammad Baqir in his “Hayatul qulub” (p.154-155) wrote:

Here end the words of Tabarsi (r.a.). Ali bin Ibrahim (a.s.) has mentioned that Imam Moosa Kazim (a.s.) said that this verse was revealed as follows: ―and the descendants of Ibrahim (Aale Ibrahim) and the descendants of Imran (Aale Imran) and the descendants of Muhammad (Aale Muhammad) above the nations.

The Aale Muhammad has been removed from the Quran. Shaykh Tusi (r.a.) has, in Majalis, reliably quoted Ibrahim Abdus Samad that he said: I have heard Imam Sadiq (a.s.) reciting this verse in this way: “Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim (Aale Ibrahim) and the descendants of Imran (Aale Imran) above the nations.” But Aale Muhammad (a.s.) has been removed from Quran. The Hazrat said: This verse has been revealed like this only.

And he said (p.441-442):

Shaykh Tabarsi in Ihtijaj, in the footnotes of the debate between the Imam Hasan (a.s.) and Muawiyah and their companions, has narrated that Imam Hasan (a.s.) said to Marwan Ibne Hakam: Allah has cursed you, your father, your dear ones and your progeny and that curse caused you to commit polytheism, sins and  transgression. As Allah says:  – and the cursed tree in the Quran‘. O Marwan you and your Progeny are the cursed tree, whom Quran has cursed and we are the people of the Quran and we know the apparent and hidden meanings of the Quran. We are from that tree praised by Allah in these words: ‗Whose root is firm and who branches are in heaven‘ It means the knowledge of the Quran would be expounded to the people of the world and our enemies are from the cursed tree: They desire to put out the light of Allah with their mouths, and Allah will not consent save to perfect His light, though the unbelievers are averse. If the hypocrites had understood the meaning of this verse, that I have mentioned, they would surely have removed it from the Quran as they have removed many verses which were clearly in our praise and in denouncement of our enemies.

And he said (p.483):

There is a tradition from Jabir Ibne Abdullah Ansari that he says: I heard theHoly Prophet (s.a.w.s.) that on the day of Judgement three things would complain (i) Holy Quran (ii) the Mosque and (iii) My Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). The Quran would say: O Allah, changes have been made in me and I have been torn apart.

And he said (p.109 – 110):

Saffar has, in Basairud Darajat and Ayyashi in Tafsir narrated the tradition of two weighty things with a number of chains from the Ahlul Bayt (a.s.). It is narrated in Basair from Imam Muhammad Baqir (a.s.) that the Almighty Allah has made three things sacred in the world: Quran, my Progeny and Holy Ka‘ba. But people made alterations in the Quran and changed it. Similarly, people ruined Ka‘ba and likewise killed my Progeny. All these three were trusts of Allah and people sabotaged all of them.

------

Now let's talk a bit about al-Kulayni.

al-Kulayni narrated in his book Al-Kafi the following narration:

“Ali b. al-Hakam from Hishaam b. Salim from Abu Abdullah [as] saying: Verily, the Qur’an which Gibril [as] came up with to Muhammad [saw] is 17,000 verses”.

According to Majlisi the narration is Authentic (مرآة العقول، ج‏12، ص: 525، مجلسی ؛ دار الکتب اسلامیه_تهران،ط2)

Majlisi said:

” This tradition (about 17000 verses in Quran) is authentic and it cannot be hidden that this traditon and many more authentic traditons are explicit in (saying) that the Quran is missing and has changed. For me, (I believe) that the traditions have reached tawatur (i.e they are numerous) with regards to the meaning, and ignoring all of it would mean ignoring all traditions accordingly , but I think that the narrations in this meaning are not less than the narrations if Imamah so how do they confirm it using traditions?”

Source: Mirat Al-Uqool Vol 12 p. 525

Al-Majlisi I (Majlisi’s Father) said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (Authentic) - Rawdat Al-Muttaqoon, vol. 10, pg. 21

al-Hur Al-‘Aamilee said this hadeeth is SaHeeH (authentic) - Al-Fawaa-id Al-Tusiyyah, topic #96, pg. 483

------

Some of al-Kulayni's narrations of tahreef.

Kulayni “Kafi” vol 1, p 417:

26 – وبهذا الاسناد، عن محمد بن سنان، عن عمار بن مروان، عن منخل، عن جابر، قال: نزل جبرئيل عليه السلام بهذه الآية على محمد هكذا: ” وإن كنتم في ريب مما نزلنا على عبدنا (في علي) فأتوا بسورة من مثله(3) “.

Translation:

“Jibril descend with this verse on Mohammad in this way: “And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed to Our servant (about Ali), then produce a chapter like it” (Quran 2:23)

Kulayni “Kafi” vol 1, p 414:

8 – الحسين بن محمد، عن معلى بن محمد، عن علي بن أسباط، عن علي بن أبي حمزة، عن أبي بصير، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام في قول الله عزوجل: ” ومن يطع الله ورسوله (في ولاية علي [وولاية] الائمة من بعده) فقد فاز فوزا عظيما(1) ” هكذا نزلت

TRANSLATION:

Al-Husayn ibn Muhammad has narrated from Mu‘alla ibn Muhammad from Ali ibn Asbat from Ali ibn abu Hamzafrom abu Basir from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) about the words of Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most Gracious. “One who obeys God and His Messenger (in the wilaya of Ali and the Imams after him) will certainly achieve a great success.”. (33:71) This how it was revealed.”

p 416

23 – الحسين بن محمد، عن معلى بن محمد، عن جعفر بن محمد بن عبيد الله(5)، عن محمد بن عيسى القمي، عن محمد بن سليمان، عن عبدالله بن سنان، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام في قوله: ” ولقد عهدنا إلى آدم من قبل ” كلمات في محمد وعلي وفاطمة والحسن والحسين والائمة عليهم السلام من ذريتهم ” فنسي ” هكذا والله نزلت على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله.

TRANSLATION:

Al-Husayn ibn Muhammad has narrated Mu‘alla ibn Muhammad from Ja‘far ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Ubaydallah from Muhammad ibn ‘Isa al-Qummifm Muhammad ibn sulayman from ‘Abdallah ibn Sinan from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) about the words of Aallah. “We had commanded Adam (certain matters) before.”The commands consisted of certain words about Ali, Fatima,al-Hassan, al-Husayn and the Imams from their descendants” He forgot Our commandment” (20:115).This is how it was revealed, by Allah, to Muhammad .

P 417

25 – علي بن إبراهيم، عن أحمد بن محمد البرقي، عن أبيه، عن محمد بن سنان عن عمار بن مروان، عن منخل، عن جابر عن ابي جعفر عليه السلام قال: نزل جبرئيل عليه السلام بهذه الآية على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله هكذا: ” بئسما اشتروا به أنفسهم أن يكفروا بما أنزل الله (في علي) بغيا

TRANSLATION:

Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Barqi from his father Muhammad ibn Sinan from ‘Ammar ibn Marwan from Munakhkhal from Jabir from abu Ja‘far (a.s.) who has said the following. ” Jibril brought this verse to Muhammad (s.a). “Evil is that for which they have sold their souls: They have refused to accept God’s revelations “about Ali” in rebellion. . .” (2:90)”

Same page:

27 – وبهذا الاسناد، عن محمد بن سنان، عن عمار بن مروان، عن منخل، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام قال: نزل جبرئيل عليه السلام على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله بهذه الآية هكذا: ” يا أيها الذين أوتوا الكتاب آمنوا بما نزلنا (في علي) نورا مبينا(4) “.

TRANSLATION:

With the same chain of narrators it is narrated Muhammad ibn Sinan from ‘Ammar ibn Marwan from Munakhkhal from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said the following. “Jibril brought the following verse to Prophet Muhammad . “People of the Book, have faith in the what We have revealed “about Ali’”. .” (4:47)

p 420-421:

43 – وبهذا الاسناد، عن أبي عبدالله عليه السلام في قول الله تعالى: ” إن الذين ارتدوا على أدبارهم من بعد ما تبين لهم الهدى(5) ” فلان وفلان وفلان، ارتدوا عن الايمان في ترك ولاية أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام قلت: قوله تعالى: ” ذلك بأنهم قالوا للذين كرهوا ما نزل الله سنطيعكم في بعض الامر(6) ” قال: نزلت والله فيهما وفي أتباعهما وهو قول الله
عزوجل الذي نزل به جبرئيل عليه السلام على محمد صلى الله عليه وآله: ” ذلك بأنهم قالوا للذين كرهوا ما نزل الله (في علي عليه السلام) سنطيعكم في بعض الامر ” قال: دعوا بني امية إلى ميثاقهم ألا يصيروا الامر فينا بعد النبي صلى الله عليه وآله ولا يعطونا من الخمس شيئا وقالوا إن أعطيناهم إياه لم يحتاجوا إلى شئ، ولم يبالوا أن يكون الامر فيهم، فقالوا: سنطيعكم في بعض الامر الذي دعوتمونا إليه وهو الخمس ألا نعطيهم منه شيئا وقوله ” كرهوا ما نزل الله ” والذي نزل الله ما افترض على خلقه من ولاية أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وكان معهم أبوعبيدة وكان كاتبهم، فأنزل الله ” أم أبرموا أمرا فإنا مبرمون * أم يحسبون أنا لا نسمع سرهم ونجواهم – الآية

TRANSLATION:

Through the same chain of narrators it is narrated from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) about the words of Allah, the Most High. “Those who have reverted to disbelief after guidance has become manifest to them, . .” .(47:25) The Imam (a.s.) said, “They are so and so and so and so who reverted from the faith in rejecting Leadership with Divine Authority of Ali (a.s.).” I then asked about the words of Allah, the Most High. “This is because they have said to those who hate God’s revelation, “We shall obey you in some matters.” . . .” (47:26) The Imam (a.s.) said, ‘By Allah, it was revealed about the two of them and their followers and that is the words of Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most gracious, that Jibril brought to Muhammad , “This is because they have said to those who hate God’s revelation, “about Ali (a.s.)”-We shall obey you in some matters. . .” (47:26) The Imam (a.s.) said, “They made an agreement with the Amawids not to allow the leadership come to us after The Holy Prophet (s.a) not to pay us the one fifth taxes saying, “We have given them already so their is no need to give them more. The transfer of leadership to them did not matter to them at all. They said, “We obey in certain matters that you want us to obey, such as the one fifth taxes. We will not pay it to them. His words that read, “who hate God’s revelation,” refers to Amir al-Mu’minin (a.s.) Leadership with Divine Authority over the creatures. With them was abu ‘Ubayda, their scribe. Allah has said, “If the unbelievers persist in their disbelief, We shall also persist in punishing them (43:79). Do they think that We do not hear their secrets and whispers? We certainly can hear them and Our Messengers record it all (43:80).”

P 424

60 – أحمد بن مهران – رحمه الله – عن عبدالعظيم، عن بكار، عن جابر، عن أبي جعفر عليه السلام قال هكذا نزلت هذه الآية ” ولو أنهم فعلوا ما يوعظون به (في علي) لكان خيرا لهم

TRANSLATION:

Ahmad Mihran has narrated –may Allah grant him blessings- from ‘Abd al-‘Azim from Bakkar from Jabir from abu Ja‘far (a.s.) who has said: “This verse of the Holy Quran was revealed as this, “If they had done what they had been advised to do “about Ali”, it would have bee for their own good . . .” (4:66)

------

There are many other sayings of the scholars of the Shi'a that prove that the Shi'a believe in the tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an. But I would like for you to respond to the sayings of these three very well-known scholars of Shiasm, then we can go on and talk about the sayings of the other Shi'i scholars regarding this topic.

------

But I hold back from calling them kaafir or doing takfir on them.

Why?? Allah said in the Qur'an { Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. }. When someone says the Qur'an has been changed or corrupted, this means Allah didn't guard it from corruption as Allah promised, this means two things:

1- Allah sent down the Qur'an and promised to guard it from corruption (tahreef), but wasn't able to do so (a'oothu billah), because it eventually was corrupted by the Sahaba like the Shi'a claim.

2- Allah promised to guard the Qur'an from corruption but lied (a'oothu billah).

So it is impossible for a person to believe in this verse from the Qur'an and believe that the Qur'an hasn been changed or corrupted, he has to choose one to believe in, and another to disbelieve in.

------

Let me ask you this question. There are plenty of Muslim women who do not do hijab and even say they do not agree with it even though it is written in the Quran. Are they kafir? Denying something that is in the Quran - I am not sure if that is disbelief or disobedience.

Not wearing hijab for the sake of beauty or fashion is not kufr, however, if one says that hijab hasn't been mentioned in the Qur'an and it isn't needed for it is not mentioned anywhere in the Qur'an, THIS IS KUFR. Get it brother?

Brother, the text highlighted in red proves that you are in doubt of your stance from the whole situation and that you aren't fully prepared to debate. You haven't taken the time to study your religion or the Qur'an, you haven't even taken the time to know the books of your scholars and their sayings, so I suggest that you do not debate with me any more until you have read and learned enough to come and debate Ahlus-Sunnah. Anyone reading the debate will see how confused you are.

------

Kafir = rejecting "there is no God but Allah" and/or rejecting "Muhammad is the Prophet of Allah"
Denying the perfection of the Quran or denying hijab, etc. is disobedience and not kufr. This is my opinion and may ben different from the opinion of Shia Scholars and Sunni scholars.

There are many things that make you a kafir, this includes the cursing of the Sahaba (companions of the Prophet) or 'Aisha (رضي الله عنها) and calling them kuffar (disbelievers) because it goes against the crystal clear verses in the Qur'an praising them! Kufr (Disbelief) isn't only rejecting that there is no God but Allah and/or rejecting Muhammad is the Prophet and Messenger of Allah

Also brother, your opinion means nothing to me, the Qur'an says that Allah will guard the book from corruption, and Shi'i scholars like al-Kulayni and al-Jazairi claim that it has been corrupted, isn't this rebelling against this verse from Surat al-Hijr or denying this verse from the Qur'an? Isn't this kufr my dear brother? Yes it is.

As I previously mentioned, not wearing hijab for the sake of beauty or fashion is not kufr, however, if one says that hijab hasn't been mentioned in the Qur'an and it isn't needed for it is not mentioned anywhere in the Qur'an, THIS IS KUFR. Get it brother?

Perhaps the wrong choice of words by me or I failed to explain clearly.

No doubt the guardianship of the Quran is with Allah. But how does that help come?

Let me explain by example.

[Quran 93:6] Did He not find you an orphan and give you shelter?

Will anyone deny that Allah gave shelter to the Prophet? No
Will anyone deny that the shelter was in Abu Talib's house? No
So if I say that Abu Talib gave shelter to the Prophet - I am merely stating a fact and in no way denying the true help was from Allah alone.

Similarly, the true and only guardianship of the Quran is with Allah. But saying that the Imams are there to protect the Quran does not mean I am replacing Allah Guardianship with theirs. All it means is that they are Allah's Choice or method of protection for His Word.

I hope this explains the context of my comments.

Fair enough.

[ShiaMan]

Wow, you are here to debate Ahlus-Sunnah regarding the issue of tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an in your madhhab and you do not know your scholars?? You make me laugh ShiaMan.

Al-Bahrani is a VERY well-known scholar, and how do you search for a book? You ask your scholars, Al-Kurani, Sistani, etc. about this book (مشارق الشموس الدرية) and Al-Bahrani, and let's see if he's known or not

So you're saying Al-Bahrani does not speak for all Shi'as? Ok, what about Nematullah al-Jazairi, al-Majlisi, Faiz Kashani, Ali Ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi, Sheikh Mufid, al-Kulaini, and others. Aren't these VERY well-known scholars enough for you and enough to speak for all Shi'as?

I am glad I make you laugh brother. I find this whole debate to be funny. I don't belief in tahreef. First you will convince me that I do; then you will tell me I am wrong and a kafir, then you will convince me the Quran is free from tahreef and I will agree.

Please explain what you mean by Al-Bahrani is well-known. Clearly he is not because I have not heard of him and I can't seem to find any information on him. He is about as real as the Lochness Monster as far as I am concerned.

We will do all this without first defining what tahreef is. Shouldnt we agree upon its definition first and then proceed?

Let's start with Nematullah al-Jazairi, he says in Nur-ul Baraheen (نور البراهين) p.526 the following:

Nematullah al-Jazairi is Akhbari. I have nothing to do with them. They constitute a very small minority and if that is their belief then they are wrong.

Al-Sayid Ali Al-Faani Al-Asfahani said in Araa’ Hawla Al-Quran (Views surrounding the Quran) p. 88:

Question 5: Who are those who view [that the Quran was subject to] Tahreef (i.e. alteration), and what is their evidence?

Answer: The Answer [is] that a number of Muhaditheen (narrators) and memorizers of traditions deduced from narrations that [the Quran was subject to] Alteration by deductions [made from it]. For that reason they adopted that [the Quran] was subject to Tahreef (alteration) by deducting [from it].

The first from among them, in what I know, is Ali ibn Ibrahim in his Tafseer. Since it was mentioned in it: Abu Al-Hasan Ali Ibn Ibrahim Al-Hashimi Al-Qumi said:

“From the Quran is Nasikh and Mansoukh (i.e. Abrogated verses and Abrogating verses) … and from it is a letter [placed] in place of another, and from it is what was Muharaf (altered), and from it is contrary to what Allah -Exalted is He- has revealed” … until he said … “As for what is Altered (Muharaf) from it is like His saying: {But Allah bears witness to that which He has revealed to you} about Ali, that is how it was revealed {… He has sent it down with His knowledge, and the angels bear witness [as well]}[Al-Nisaa 166], and His saying: {O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord …} about Ali {… and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message} [Al-Maeda 67]*. And His saying: {Indeed, those who disbelieve and commit wrong [or injustice] …} [in regards to] the rights of the Household of Mohammed {… – never will Allah forgive them, nor will He guide them to a path} [Al-Nisaa 168]**. {And those who have wronged …} the Household of Mohammed their rights {… are going to know to what [kind of] return they will be returned} [Al-shu’araa 227]. And His saying:{And if you could but see} those who have wronged Mohammed’s household their rights {are in the overwhelming pangs of death} [Al-Anaam 93], and from these are plenty which we will mention in its location [1]. What was intended from his speech has been complete.

That (i.e. that view of Tahreef) also appears from Al-Kulayni where he narrates traditions apparent in that and does not comment on it. Al-Sayid Al-Jazae’iri also goes to [that view of] Tahreef in his explanations on the two Tahzeebs, and has mentioned an elongated research on that matter in a Treatise which he named -Manbaa’ Al-Haya-”

* Original Arabic refers this verse to Al-Maeda 70, which is incorrect

** He refers the verse to Al-Nisaa 167, which is another mistake.

[1] Tafseer Al-Qumi Volume 1 page 9, 10, & 11.

Do you mean Sayyid Abu al-Hasan al-Isfahani??? Either way, in your text he is explaining what someone believes, not reiterating his beliefs.
Like you are saying shias believe in tahreef - does it mean you do? No
Similarly, he is repeating what others are saying.

Now let's see what al-Majlisi thinks of the Qur'an.

Majlisi is the one legit name that has commented on the tahreef in the Quran. His opinions are his own and by no means  mean that all shias hold this belief.
To counter, below is a list of all Sunni scholars who believe in tahreef of some sort:

• Abdul Wahab bin Ahmed bin Ali Sherani - Al-Yawaqeet wa al-Jawahir
• Abi Bakar al-Haythami
• Abi Bakar Sajistani - Al Musahif
• Abu Muhammad Ali bin Ahmed Ibn Hazm Andalusi - Al-Ahkam fe usul Al-Ahkam
• Al Muhazraat
• Badruddin Aini - Umdatul Qari
• Bukhari: Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 468
• Fakhruddin Razi - Al-Mahsool
• Ibn Hajar Asqalani - Fatah al Bari
• Ibn Taymiyyah - Majmua al-Fatawa
• Israr Ahmed
• Jalaluddin Suyuti - Al Itqan fi Uloom al Quran
• Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri - Faiz al Bari
• Mushaf of Sahabi Ubai bin Ka'b
• Qasim bin Salam - Fadhael al-Quran
• Sahih Muslim
• Shahabuddin Qastalani - Irshad al Saari
• Surah Khul’a and Surah Haqd referenced in several Sunni books.
• Tafseer Dur e Manthur
• Tafseer Fath al Qadeer
• Tafseer Gharaib al-Quran
• Tafseer Ibn Kathir
• Tafseer Kashaf
• Tafseer Madarik al-Tanzeel 
• Tafseer Mazhari
• Tafseer Qurtubi
• Tafseer Ruh al Mani

But I want concentrate on this narration:

Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
...`Umar sat on the pulpit and when the callmakers for the prayer had finished their call, `Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said, "Now then, I am going to tell you something which (Allah) has written for me to say. I do not know; perhaps it portends my death, so whoever understands and remembers it, must narrate it to the others wherever his mount takes him, but if somebody is afraid that he does not understand it, then it is unlawful for him to tell lies about me. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Holy Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajam (the stoning of married person (male & female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him. I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, 'By Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah's Book,' and thus they will go astray by leaving an obligation which Allah has revealed. And the punishment of the Rajam is to be inflicted to any married person (male & female), who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if the required evidence is available or there is conception or confession...
Sahih al-Bukhari
Book 86, Hadith 57
I am not interested in the punishment for adultery as much as I am in the Verse itself. Who decided that this verse should not be in the Quran? What surah was it part of? Caliph Umar is acknowledging a verse if omitted from the Quran so he believes in tahreef. Sahih Bukhari is narrating this as authentic so he believes in tahreef. All sunnis beleive Sahih Bukhari to be 100% accurate so all Sunnis believe in tahreef. Am I missing something?

Now let's talk a bit about al-Kulayni.

al-Kulayni narrated in his book Al-Kafi the following narration:

“Ali b. al-Hakam from Hishaam b. Salim from Abu Abdullah [as] saying: Verily, the Qur’an which Gibril [as] came up with to Muhammad [saw] is 17,000 verses”.

Al-Kulayni is repeating a narration; does not mean he believes it similar to what I stated above. Or for example:
Jalaluddin Suyuti  - Al Itqan, fi Uloom al Quran
Umar narrated that the Prophet's  said: “The Qur'an has 1,027,000 letters and whoever reads them with the intention of earning reward [Thawab] shall attain a female Hoor from paradise against each letter. All the narrators of this tradition are Thiqah”.

According to Ibn Abbas, the present Quran contains 326631 letters, that means according to the tradition narrated by Umar, 700369 letters are missing from the present Quran which ultimately means that the number of letters in the present Quran have to be thrice its present total in order to comply with the statement that Umar attributed to Prophet , but in that case the number Juz/Parahs would jet up to ninety

Why?? Allah said in the Qur'an { Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. }. When someone says the Qur'an has been changed or corrupted, this means Allah didn't guard it from corruption as Allah promised, this means two things:

1- Allah sent down the Qur'an and promised to guard it from corruption (tahreef), but wasn't able to do so (a'oothu billah), because it eventually was corrupted by the Sahaba like the Shi'a claim.

2- Allah promised to guard the Qur'an from corruption but lied (a'oothu billah).

So it is impossible for a person to believe in this verse from the Qur'an and believe that the Qur'an hasn been changed or corrupted, he has to choose one to believe in, and another to disbelieve in.
------

Not wearing hijab for the sake of beauty or fashion is not kufr, however, if one says that hijab hasn't been mentioned in the Qur'an and it isn't needed for it is not mentioned anywhere in the Qur'an, THIS IS KUFR. Get it brother?

Brother, the text highlighted in red proves that you are in doubt of your stance from the whole situation and that you aren't fully prepared to debate. You haven't taken the time to study your religion or the Qur'an, you haven't even taken the time to know the books of your scholars and their sayings, so I suggest that you do not debate with me any more until you have read and learned enough to come and debate Ahlus-Sunnah. Anyone reading the debate will see how confused you are.

------

We are in agreement that Quran has been protected by Allah. So the question is that when someone denies the authenticity of the Quran are they speaking kufr or do that become kafir.
I am not confused about the issue at all. But I am hesitant to call someone a kafir when they say "lā ʾilāha ʾillā-llāh, muḥammadur-rasūlu-llāh". I am sorry to say that you guys are too quick to call people kafir without understanding the ramifications of your words.
Is believing in the Perfection of the Quran 1 of the 5 Pillars of Islam for the Sunnis? No
Is believing in the Perfection of the Quran 1 of the 6 Articles of Faith (Usul-e-deen) for shias? No
Is there an ayah in the Quran that categorically states that those who do not believe in the perfection of the Quran are kafir? No
So while saying "there is tahreef in the Quran" is kufr because it is denying what Allah has said, in no way does that make a Muslim a kafir and I sincerely challenge you to show me otherwise. And if you can, then I will happily call any and all Muslims who believe in tahreef to be kaafirs including the Sunni scholars and sahaba mentioned above.
Are you saying that anyone who says a word of kufr automatically becomes a kafir?
I can bring forth proof that prominent sahaba such as Caliph Umar & Uthman believed in additions/deletions/changes/distortions. Will you do takfir on them then?

There are many things that make you a kafir, this includes the cursing of the Sahaba (companions of the Prophet) or 'Aisha (رضي الله عنها) and calling them kuffar (disbelievers) because it goes against the crystal clear verses in the Qur'an praising them! Kufr (Disbelief) isn't only rejecting that there is no God but Allah and/or rejecting Muhammad is the Prophet and Messenger of Allah

Also brother, your opinion means nothing to me, the Qur'an says that Allah will guard the book from corruption, and Shi'i scholars like al-Kulayni and al-Jazairi claim that it has been corrupted, isn't this rebelling against this verse from Surat al-Hijr or denying this verse from the Qur'an? Isn't this kufr my dear brother? Yes it is.

As I previously mentioned, not wearing hijab for the sake of beauty or fashion is not kufr, however, if one says that hijab hasn't been mentioned in the Qur'an and it isn't needed for it is not mentioned anywhere in the Qur'an, THIS IS KUFR. Get it brother?

So let's leave cursing (La'an) out of this since we will digress. Suffice to say we curse the enemies of the AhlulBayt whoever they may be. No enemy gets a free pass based on their status.

Instead of going all over the place, if you see fit should we do the following:
1) Define tahreef
2) Trade narrations on Shia and Sunni scholars who believe in it
3) Determine the classification of those who believe in tahreef

Or we can proceed however you see fit.

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

You have mentioned some narrations from the books of Ahlus-Sunnah, don't you see the title of the topic!?

Let me remind you that we are discussing the issue of tahreef of the Qur'an in Shiasm and not in the Madhhab of Ahlus-Sunnah! We are discussing narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt (as the Shi'a claim) clearly stating that the Qur'an between our hands isn't the Qur'an that was revealed by Allah to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) through Archangel Gabriel (جبريل), we are also discussing the sayings of the Shi'a scholars that say that the Qur'an has been changed/corrupted, and that there are missing verses in the Qur'an, etc.

Please FOCUS!

-------------------------------------------------------

Now since you do not have anything to do with Ni'matullah al-Jazairi, of course you cannot say that with al-Majlisi, or al-Kulayni, Sheikh Mufeed and others, right?

Let us see what other scholars of Shiasm have to say regarding this issue of tahreef:

-------------------------------------------------------

Sheikh Mufeed:

“The narrations from the Imams of Ahl-ul Bayt stating the changing of the Qur’an and what others changed in it by deleting from it or removing some verses and words are extensive.”

Awail al-Maqalaat p.93

Comment: This is a book ShiaChat.com member Ibn al-Hussain quoted from! (http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235040413-debate-on-tahreef-quran-in-shia-madhab/?do=findComment&comment=2939720)

———

Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi:

“It cannot be doubted that there are many authentic (SaHeeH) narrations that obviously state the Qur’an has been changed and some of the verses in it have been removed, and for me these narrations are mutawaatir (VERY authentic).”

Miraat-ul ‘Uqool 12/525

———

The Mufassir (commentator) of the Qur’an Sayyid Hashim al-Bahrani:

“I know that the truth according to the mutawaatir narrations following and others, is that the Qur’an that is between our hands has been changed after the death of the Prophet (SAA), and that those who collected it (the Qur’an) removed many words and verses, and that the Qur’an that has been guarded from what has been mentioned, the one that Allah revealed is what Ali (A.S) collected and kept until it reached his son al-Hassan (A.S), and so it went on until it reached al-Qaem (A.S), and today it is with him.”

Comment: Why is it with al-Qaem (al-Mahdi) and not with us? Isn’t the Qur’an between our hands today the Qur’an that was revealed by Allah to His Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) through Archangel Gabriel?

Al-Burhan Fe Tafsir al-Qur’an - Introduction p.36

al-Bahrani also said:

“And according to me, after analysing the authenticity of this belief (the belief in the corruption of the Qur’an), and after the analysing the narrations and “athaar,” it can be concluded that it is from the neccesities of the maddhab of Tashayu’ (Shi’a Maddhab).”

Al-Burhan Fe Tafsir al-Qur’an p.49

-------------------------------------------------------

Remember ShiaMan, we are discussing the topic of tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an in Shiasm, don't bring me narrations from the books of Ahlus-Sunnah, in this debate it means nothing to me and I won't waste my time refuting your claims for it is not our topic that is being discussed, rather it is you who has to refute the MANY claims I have made and many narrations and sayings of Shi'i scholars that without doubt CLAIM that the Qur'an has been corrupted.

-------------------------------------------------------

To counter, below is a list of all Sunni scholars who believe in tahreef of some sort:
Abdul Wahab bin Ahmed bin Ali Sherani - Al-Yawaqeet wa al-Jawahir
Abi Bakar al-Haythami
Abi Bakar Sajistani - Al Musahif
Abu Muhammad Ali bin Ahmed Ibn Hazm Andalusi - Al-Ahkam fe usul Al-Ahkam
Al Muhazraat
Badruddin Aini - Umdatul Qari
Bukhari: Vol. 6, Book 60, Hadith 468
Fakhruddin Razi - Al-Mahsool
Ibn Hajar Asqalani - Fatah al Bari
Ibn Taymiyyah - Majmua al-Fatawa
Israr Ahmed
Jalaluddin Suyuti - Al Itqan fi Uloom al Quran
Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri - Faiz al Bari
Mushaf of Sahabi Ubai bin Ka'b
Qasim bin Salam - Fadhael al-Quran
Sahih Muslim
Shahabuddin Qastalani - Irshad al Saari
Surah Khul’a and Surah Haqd referenced in several Sunni books.
Tafseer Dur e Manthur
Tafseer Fath al Qadeer
Tafseer Gharaib al-Quran
Tafseer Ibn Kathir
Tafseer Kashaf
Tafseer Madarik al-Tanzeel
Tafseer Mazhari
Tafseer Qurtubi
Tafseer Ruh al Mani

This debate is funny, you ignored the topic being discussed and came with names of SCHOLARS as you said, what's really funny is that you typed names of books of Hadith and Tafsir and other Sunni books. This shows how ignorant you are (and I apologise for calling you that), but you couldn't differentiate between names of scholars and names of books for Allah's sake, and you're here debating and defending your maddhab! *facepalm*

-------------------------------------------------------

Is there an ayah in the Quran that categorically states that those who do not believe in the perfection of the Quran are kafir? No

YES THERE IS, Allah clearly said in His glorious book the Qur'an:

{ Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. } [Qur'an Surah al-Hijr Verse 9]

I said this previously but I'll repeat it again, when someone says the Qur'an has been changed or corrupted, this means Allah didn't guard it from corruption as Allah promised, this means two things:

1- Allah sent down the Qur'an and promised to guard it from corruption (tahreef), but wasn't able to do so (a'oothu billah), because it eventually was corrupted by the Sahaba like the Shi'a claim.

2- Allah promised to guard the Qur'an from corruption but lied (a'oothu billah).

So it is impossible for a person to believe in this verse from the Qur'an and believe that the Qur'an hasn't been changed or corrupted, he has to choose one to believe in, and another to disbelieve in.

-------------------------------------------------------

Do you mean Sayyid Abu al-Hasan al-Isfahani??? Either way, in your text he is explaining what someone believes, not reiterating his beliefs.
Like you are saying shias believe in tahreef - does it mean you do? No
Similarly, he is repeating what others are saying.

When I quoted his fatwa I didn't try to say that he (al-Isfahani) believed in the tahreef of the Qur'an, rather I tried to prove that al-Isfahani admitted that al-Qummi, the writer of the most famous Shi'i tafsir book believed in the tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an, and he (al-Isfahani) did admit that Ali Ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi believed in the tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an! So one of the most well-known Shi'i scholars believes in the tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an!! You are in big trouble ShiaMan!

-------------------------------------------------------

In conclusion, what I am trying to do is not attack Shiasm, nor am I trying to make takfir on Shi'as, rather, I am trying to prove to my dear Shi'a brothers and sisters how it is necessary for a Shi'i to believe in the corruption (tahreef) of the Qur'an in order to remain a Shi'i, if he didn't believe in it (corruption of the Qur'an), he cannot remain a Shi'i, for it a necessity of the maddhab as the mufassir al-Bahrani said! (Al-Burhan Fe Tafsir al-Qur’an p.49).

I am trying to shed light on the truth, so that falsehood can be perished by the will of Allah, but do you know my dear brothers and sister, Sunnis and Shi'ites, what ShiaMan is trying to do? Or at least why he is debating in this forum? Let us see why he joined this forum in the first place:

Yup.

That is such a ridiculous site.

One guy keeps calling me an ape. He is the moderator of the site.

Another guy takes pleasure in the mass killings of shia.

A third guy has an anal fixation and endorses the abuse of hazara boys in Afghanistan.

I admitted it there and I will tell you here too that I only started posting there to harass them. They are so easy to tick off.

This post #7 in the topic titled 'Debate of Tahreef Quran in Shia Madhab' made by ShiaChat.com member Abul Hussain Hassani.

This is a link to the topic on the Shi'i forum linking to the exact post of ShiaMan: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235040413-debate-on-tahreef-quran-in-shia-madhab/?do=findComment&comment=2939551

This is a screen-cap of him showing why he joined the forum in the first place, he didn't join to show the truth to Sunnis, I mean I joined this forum for the sole-purpose of trying to show my dear Shi'a brothers and sisters the truth and shed some light on their madhhab, unlike ShiaMan, who thinks that we are easy to tick off and joined for the purpose of harrassing Ahlus-Sunnah.

Link: http://oi67.tinypic.com/261l1xg.jpg

Dear brothers and sisters, Sunnis and Shi'ites, reading this debate, do you notice how many narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt (as Shi'as claim) and sayings of Shi'i scholars that prove the Qur'an has been corrupted or changed he (ShiaMan) ignored? I am asking why? Why is he ignoring all this? Re-read my posts and re-read his, see how many sayings of scholars and how many narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt he COMPLETELY IGNORED! Why is he trying so hard to run away from the topic of tahreef of the Qur'an in Shiasm and is trying very hard to discuss the issue of tahreef in the maddhab (sect) of Ahlus-Sunnah? You know the answer.

[ShiaMan]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

You have mentioned some narrations from the books of Ahlus-Sunnah, don't you see the title of the topic!?

Let me remind you that we are discussing the issue of tahreef of the Qur'an in Shiasm and not in the Madhhab of Ahlus-Sunnah! We are discussing narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt (as the Shi'a claim) clearly stating that the Qur'an between our hands isn't the Qur'an that was revealed by Allah to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) through Archangel Gabriel (جبريل), we are also discussing the sayings of the Shi'a scholars that say that the Qur'an has been changed/corrupted, and that there are missing verses in the Qur'an, etc.

Please FOCUS!

---------

One would think that while discussing Shia believe in tahreef, we would use the Sunni belief in tahreef (or not) as a benchmark but I understand one sided kangaroo-court nature of this debate.

My mistake. I will promptly ask Farid to start a concurrent topic labelled, "Tahreef Al-Qur'an in Sunnism: Abu Jasim vs ShiaMan" and invite you to it so we can discuss the plethora of Sunni scholars and even Caliphs who believe in tahreef. I will even let you pick whether you want to discuss tahreef vis-a-vis Caliph Umar or Caliph Uthman or Hz Aisha. Subsequently once I prove their acknowledgement of tahreef, I will let you be the first to do tafkir on them. Agreed?

Sheikh Mufeed:

Mufeed is saying there are narrations about tahreef, he is not stating his own opinion it.

Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi:

Majlisi - already discussed and acknowledged.

The Mufassir (commentator) of the Qur’an Sayyid Hashim al-Bahrani:

“I know that the truth according to the mutawaatir narrations following and others, is that the Qur’an that is between our hands has been changed after the death of the Prophet (SAA), and that those who collected it (the Qur’an) removed many words and verses, and that the Qur’an that has been guarded from what has been mentioned, the one that Allah revealed is what Ali (A.S) collected and kept until it reached his son al-Hassan (A.S), and so it went on until it reached al-Qaem (A.S), and today it is with him.”

Comment: Why is it with al-Qaem (al-Mahdi) and not with us? Isn’t the Qur’an between our hands today the Qur’an that was revealed by Allah to His Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) through Archangel Gabriel?

Al-Burhan Fe Tafsir al-Qur’an - Introduction p.36

al-Bahrani also said:

“And according to me, after analysing the authenticity of this belief (the belief in the corruption of the Qur’an), and after the analysing the narrations and “athaar,” it can be concluded that it is from the neccesities of the maddhab of Tashayu’ (Shi’a Maddhab).”

Al-Burhan Fe Tafsir al-Qur’an p.49

Syed Hashim Al-Bahrani - another Akbari.

Remember ShiaMan, we are discussing the topic of tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an in Shiasm, don't bring me narrations from the books of Ahlus-Sunnah, in this debate it means nothing to me and I won't waste my time refuting your claims for it is not our topic that is being discussed, rather it is you who has to refute the MANY claims I have made and many narrations and sayings of Shi'i scholars that without doubt CLAIM that the Qur'an has been corrupted.

So far, you have brought Majlisi. His opinions are neither secret nor eye-opening nor earth-shattering nor the kind of smoking gun I was promised.
Please tell me you have something better.

This debate is funny, you ignored the topic being discussed and came with names of SCHOLARS as you said, what's really funny is that you typed names of books of Hadith and Tafsir and other Sunni books. This shows how ignorant you are (and I apologise for calling you that), but you couldn't differentiate between names of scholars and names of books for Allah's sake, and you're here debating and defending your maddhab! *facepalm*

Gosh darn it. You got me. I thought Tafseer meant "Mr."
Shame on me for assuming that you and the audience of this site would know who the scholars were of the more famous books such as Bukhari (author and book name), Muslim (author and book name), Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Mushaf of Sahabi Ubai bin Ka'b, etc. In future, I will be sure to name the author and book separately and even color-code for you.
BTW, you dont know this but you have already lost this debate. Once debaters start focusing on mundane and useless items such as book name vs author name (assuming the guy presenting doesn't know the difference) - it just shows how little material you have to actually engage in what matters. But we shall trek on.

Is there an ayah in the Quran that categorically states that those who do not believe in the perfection of the Quran are kafir? No

YES THERE IS, Allah clearly said in His glorious book the Qur'an:

{ Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian. } [Qur'an Surah al-Hijr Verse 9]

I said this previously but I'll repeat it again, when someone says the Qur'an has been changed or corrupted, this means Allah didn't guard it from corruption as Allah promised, this means two things:

1- Allah sent down the Qur'an and promised to guard it from corruption (tahreef), but wasn't able to do so (a'oothu billah), because it eventually was corrupted by the Sahaba like the Shi'a claim.

2- Allah promised to guard the Qur'an from corruption but lied (a'oothu billah).

So it is impossible for a person to believe in this verse from the Qur'an and believe that the Qur'an hasn't been changed or corrupted, he has to choose one to believe in, and another to disbelieve in.

You just quoted the same ayah again and expect a different result??? First define what you mean by tahreef and then we can discuss the punishment on it. For example, there is general consensus that Surah Alaq was the first surah revealed followed by Qalam.......Tawbah, Nasr (note: just to explain to you the "......." means all surahs in between since I am sure you would say "look at ShiaMan he thinks there is a surah called Qalam.......Tawbah"). However Caliph Uthman arranged them in longest to shortest. Is this tahreef? Is he kafir?

So please explain what you think tahreef to be?

When I quoted his fatwa I didn't try to say that he (al-Isfahani) believed in the tahreef of the Qur'an, rather I tried to prove that al-Isfahani admitted that al-Qummi, the writer of the most famous Shi'i tafsir book believed in the tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an, and he (al-Isfahani) did admit that Ali Ibn Ibrahim al-Qummi believed in the tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an! So one of the most well-known Shi'i scholars believes in the tahreef (corruption) of the Qur'an!! You are in big trouble ShiaMan!

Are you sure you are not confusing tahreef with naskh?

In conclusion, what I am trying to do is not attack Shiasm, nor am I trying to make takfir on Shi'as, rather, I am trying to prove to my dear Shi'a brothers and sisters how it is necessary for a Shi'i to believe in the corruption (tahreef) of the Qur'an in order to remain a Shi'i, if he didn't believe in it (corruption of the Qur'an), he cannot remain a Shi'i, for it a necessity of the maddhab as the mufassir al-Bahrani said! (Al-Burhan Fe Tafsir al-Qur’an p.49).

I am trying to shed light on the truth, so that falsehood can be perished by the will of Allah, but do you know my dear brothers and sister, Sunnis and Shi'ites, what ShiaMan is trying to do? Or at least why he is debating in this forum? Let us see why he joined this forum in the first place:

You sound like George Bush claiming victory when this debate has just started. To-date you have done the following:
1) Presented 2 Akhbaris - their stance is well known
2) Majlisi - his opinions are well-known
3) Qummi - you have assumed to be tahreef but I need a clear explanation if yu consider belief in naskh to be believe in tahreef.
4) Refused to include Sunni scholar views on thareef even though that is a plethora of them.

Have I missed anything?

I am trying to shed light on the truth, so that falsehood can be perished by the will of Allah, but do you know my dear brothers and sister, Sunnis and Shi'ites, what ShiaMan is trying to do? Or at least why he is debating in this forum? Let us see why he joined this forum in the first place:

Yup.

That is such a ridiculous site.

One guy keeps calling me an ape. He is the moderator of the site.

Another guy takes pleasure in the mass killings of shia.

A third guy has an anal fixation and endorses the abuse of hazara boys in Afghanistan.

I admitted it there and I will tell you here too that I only started posting there to harass them. They are so easy to tick off.

This post #7 in the topic titled 'Debate of Tahreef Quran in Shia Madhab' made by ShiaChat.com member Abul Hussain Hassani.

This is a link to the topic on the Shi'i forum linking to the exact post of ShiaMan: http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235040413-debate-on-tahreef-quran-in-shia-madhab/?do=findComment&comment=2939551

This is a screen-cap of him showing why he joined the forum in the first place, he didn't join to show the truth to Sunnis, I mean I joined this forum for the sole-purpose of trying to show my dear Shi'a brothers and sisters the truth and shed some light on their madhhab, unlike ShiaMan, who thinks that we are easy to tick off and joined for the purpose of harrassing Ahlus-Sunnah.

Link: http://oi67.tinypic.com/261l1xg.jpg

The whole point of this site is to discredit the shias so of course I joined to harass people here. Look at the low level of intellectualism on this site. You guys dont debate serious issues in a professional and dignified manner. Calling me an ape, taking pleasure in the massing killings of shias, fixation with my butt - you have to earn credibility. To be specific, I joined to harass the people on this site, not Ahle-Sunnah. For example. Fahad Sani is here and will not have any complaints about me; GreatChineseFall is here. Him and I have had long discussions on a variety of issues and even made snide comments to each other. But I bet even he will agree with me that this site is full of imbeciles (no offense to you and Farid of course). I even put it in one of the earliest posts that I am taking you guys as a joke.
Now let me teach you about debating. This thread is going pretty much way I thought it would. After a couple of posts, you will make it personal rather than topical.
Do you honestly think I dont know "Abul Hussain Hassani" is a plant from this site. He could be Farid or you or another user from here.
You dont think I know how often ShiaChat is referenced here?
You don't think I said everything I wrote on purpose (I did mean it) to make sure it gets back to this site. While you are focused on me 'harassing', others are focused on name-calling, massacre-endorsements and anal fixation that takes place on this site. More importantly, thank you for the link back to ShiaChat. If any of the 10s of readers on this site did not know of ShiaChat, they do now. And if even 1 of the 10s sees the truth, then that post and this discussion is worth it.
You make it too easy. Its like taking candy from a child....

Dear brothers and sisters, Sunnis and Shi'ites, reading this debate, do you notice how many narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt (as Shi'as claim) and sayings of Shi'i scholars that prove the Qur'an has been corrupted or changed he (ShiaMan) ignored? I am asking why? Why is he ignoring all this? Re-read my posts and re-read his, see how many sayings of scholars and how many narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt he COMPLETELY IGNORED! Why is he trying so hard to run away from the topic of tahreef of the Qur'an in Shiasm and is trying very hard to discuss the issue of tahreef in the maddhab (sect) of Ahlus-Sunnah? You know the answer.

Dear brothers and sisters, Sunnis and Shi'ites, reading this debate - have you noticed Abu-Jasim only has Majlisi to talk about and even that is not some big secret. Majlisi's opinions are well known and I have acknowledged them - so how does that mean I am running from them?
Since Abu Jasim has not defined what tahreef is, I am not making this argument but I could that Majlisi believes in tahreef of the Quran because Caliph Uthman changed the order of surahs from chronologically by revelation to chronologically by length. And if by his definition that makes Majlisi kafir, then what does that make Caliph Uthman? (Note: I am being hypothetical here, not disrespectful).

In conclusion:
Are there Shia scholars who believe in tahreef? Yes but only a handful
Are there Sunni scholars who believe in tahreef? Yes and more than a handful

Why does Abu Jasim want to discuss the Shia Scholar Tahreef beliefs and avoid the Sunni tahreef beliefs? You know the answer.

[Abu Jasim Al-Salafi]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

So brother ShiaMan just said:

BTW, you dont know this but you have already lost this debate.

I guess he accepted to debate me because he wanted to WIN this debate, it's like he is playing a game.

Brother, we are debating to show people the truth, to prove that Shi'i scholars believed in tahreef of the Qur'an.

-------

When al-Majlisi says the following:

“It cannot be doubted that there are many authentic (SaHeeH) narrations that obviously state the Qur’an has been changed and some of the verses in it have been removed, and for me these narrations are mutawaatir (VERY authentic).”

What does this mean?

He's clearly stating that there are authentic narrations stating that the Qur'an has been changed (corrupted), and he also added that these narrations according to him are mutawaatir. This clearly means that he believed that these narrations are authentic as he said and its authenticity cannot be doubted by anyone!

-------

When Sheikh Mufeed says:

“The narrations from the Imams of Ahl-ul Bayt stating the changing of the Qur’an and what others changed in it by deleting from it or removing some verses and words are extensive.”

He's clearly saying that there are extensive narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt that the Qur'an has been changed (corrupted)!!

---------

Now I don't care about the beliefs of your scholars, even though most of them believed in the tahreef of the Qur'an, I am now going to focus on the narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt that say that the Qur'an has been changed, do you believe that there are authentic narrations from Ahl-ul Bayt that state that the Qur'an has been corrupted (changed) or not?

If yes, then you're in really big trouble.

If no, then I challenge you to give me one authentic narration from Ahl-ul Bayt that says that the Qur'an hasn't been changed or corrupted.

----------

Why does Abu Jasim want to discuss the Shia Scholar Tahreef beliefs and avoid the Sunni tahreef beliefs? You know the answer.

Yes they do, because the topic of the debate is Tahreef Al-Qur'an in Shiasm, not tahreef according to Ahlus-Sunnah ShiaMan


---------


Wait, oh no, I'm in big trouble!

I LOST THIS DEBATE

ShiaMan says:

BTW, you dont know this but you have already lost this debate

NOOOOOO!!

[ShiaMan]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

So brother ShiaMan just said:

BTW, you dont know this but you have already lost this debate.

I guess he accepted to debate me because he wanted to WIN this debate, it's like he is playing a game.

Brother, we are debating to show people the truth, to prove that Shi'i scholars believed in tahreef of the Qur'an.
-------

Salaam brother.

Definition of debate: Debate is a method of formally presenting an argument in a disciplined manner. Through logical consistency, factual accuracy and some degree of emotional appeal to the audience are elements in debating, where one side often prevails over the other party by presenting a superior "context" and/or framework of the issue

Not to get into semantics, but perhaps you should have called for a discussion rather than challenge for a debate.

Pending item: What is tahreef?

When al-Majlisi says the following:

“It cannot be doubted that there are many authentic (SaHeeH) narrations that obviously state the Qur’an has been changed and some of the verses in it have been removed, and for me these narrations are mutawaatir (VERY authentic).”

What does this mean?

He's clearly stating that there are authentic narrations stating that the Qur'an has been changed (corrupted), and he also added that these narrations according to him are mutawaatir. This clearly means that he believed that these narrations are authentic as he said and its authenticity cannot be doubted by anyone!

Are we in agreement that instead of having several discussions all over the place, let's concentrate on Majlisi only (for now)?

You have lost the debate but there are more discussions to be had.

[ShiaMan]

I am guessing you are busy. No worries. Catch you next week brother.