TwelverShia.net Forum
Sunni Shia Discussion Forum => Quran-Tafseer => Topic started by: Arabismo on March 21, 2016, 04:11:58 PM
-
Found this here. Seems the guy took time to write his post ;D Just wanted to inform the forum about it
http://www.shiachat.com/forum/topic/235036433-tahrif-confessions-of-farid-the-nasibi/
-
Thanks for sharing Habeebi. I was just going to make a post about this. =]
Can someone please ask the brother what recitation he recites the Qur'an in? I would like to invite him to our forum, or at least to discuss these things via PM with me.
I have pointed out in the article that some Shia scholars, like Ayatullah Abdul Hadi Al Fadhli believe in the Sunni position of seven ahruf. Perhaps he will accuse him of tahreef too.
I would like someone to ask him which qira'a he recites. =]
-
Invite him here, or he can respond from there, if he doesn't Farid should address his points here and we'll add em as clarifications for the article.
-
Thanks for sharing Habeebi. I was just going to make a post about this. =]
Can someone please ask the brother what recitation he recites the Qur'an in? I would like to invite him to our forum, or at least to discuss these things via PM with me.
I have pointed out in the article that some Shia scholars, like Ayatullah Abdul Hadi Al Fadhli believe in the Sunni position of seven ahruf. Perhaps he will accuse him of tahreef too.
I would like someone to ask him which qira'a he recites. =]
Brother Farid.
I've not read the article in question, but I'm keen in your view to ask was Uthman (RA) successful in compiling the Qur'an with every verse exactly as it was revealed from the heavens. By, that I don't mean in any particular order.
I understand scribal errors may have been made, but I mean the original Mushaf when it was completed.
-
Yes brother, I believe that his compilation is 100% accurate.
However, I also believe (and anyone that knows Arabic) that the Uthmani script is not written according to how words are pronounced.
For example, the word "knot" has a silent "k". It is not read "keh-not".
According to the Uthmani script, many words are not written in the way that they are pronounced, however, this creates no trouble for Arabic readers, since we know how to pronounce these words.
Example: The word "salat" is written as "salwa". صلوة instead of صلاة
Everyone knows it is supposed to be read as "salat". However, many Arabs of the time had their own writing rules and many of these rules still exist today.
Nobody says this is Tahreef. It is beyond me that anyone could interpret this admission as Tahreef.
-
Hmmm.
-
Do let me know if this seems problematic? It shouldn't be, but it is not often talked about, which is why it would seem strange to those that are realizing this for the first time.
I choose the word "realizing" because most of us have simply grown up with this and never thought twice about why some of the words are so obviously different from the way they are pronounced.
Other obvious examples are:
بسم الله الرحمن
If we were to write it in the same way it would pronounced, then it would be written as:
باسم اللاه الرحمان
Bism Allah Alrahmaan
However, we are so used to the Qur'anic script, that we all write it in the Uthmani form.
-
Hmmm.
The orthography of the Quran is one matter, its recitation is another matter, and this is mentioned in introductory lectures on the Quran: That is why the Twelver assumption that one, in the time of the Prophet (SAW), could just pick up the Quran and read it like one reads a newspaper shows their ignorance, and shows they are not interested in the basic fact that reading the Quran even for Arabs was something that had to be learned.
-
Yes brother, I believe that his compilation is 100% accurate.
However, I also believe (and anyone that knows Arabic) that the Uthmani script is not written according to how words are pronounced.
For example, the word "knot" has a silent "k". It is not read "keh-not".
According to the Uthmani script, many words are not written in the way that they are pronounced, however, this creates no trouble for Arabic readers, since we know how to pronounce these words.
Example: The word "salat" is written as "salwa". صلوة instead of صلاة
Everyone knows it is supposed to be read as "salat". However, many Arabs of the time had their own writing rules and many of these rules still exist today.
Nobody says this is Tahreef. It is beyond me that anyone could interpret this admission as Tahreef.
Farid, wasn't the very purpose of the one Mushaf was to retain the pronunciation/accent of the Quraish? The narrations mentioned in the article by ibn Abbas (RA) and 'A'aisha (RA) saying there is a scribal error - what are they referring to?
-
The Mushaf of Uthman was written with the purpose of preventing people from claiming that "my recitation is better than yours" as per the Saheeh narrations in the Saheehain.
I have described in detail my thoughts on what A'isha and Ibn Abbas were referring to in the article:
http://twelvershia.net/2015/11/25/defense-sunni-view-quran/
See last section.
-
You know the Rafidah are getting desperate with a thread title like that
-
They see Nawasib everywhere :D
-
Is there a method to determine when something was narrated by a companion? Like this one?
Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn `Abbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Qur'an) which has been revealed to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!"
Narrated `Ikrima:
Ibn `Abbas said, "How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about their Books while you have Allah's Book (the Qur'an) which is the most recent of the Books revealed by Allah, and you read it in its pure undistorted form?"
Narrated Ubaidullah bin `Abdullah bin `Utba:
Ibn `Abbas said, "O Muslims? How do you ask the people of the Scriptures, though your Book (i.e. the Qur'an) which was revealed to His Prophet is the most recent information from Allah and you recite it, the Book that has not been distorted? Allah has revealed to you that the people of the scriptures have changed with their own hands what was revealed to them and they have said (as regards their changed Scriptures): This is from Allah, in order to get some worldly benefit thereby." Ibn `Abbas added: "Isn't the knowledge revealed to you sufficient to prevent you from asking them? By Allah I have never seen any one of them asking (Muslims) about what has been revealed to you."
-
Ustadh and others,
By the one who created me, as an Ex-Shia, I assure you, the reason the nation of Rafd and Zandaqah doesn't seem to understand the difference between the blatant kufri belief of top Shia scholars in tahrif of the Qur'an at the hands of Sahaba by removing and adding verses AND the Sunni belief in d Qira'aat, Ahruf or that some Sahaba based on their limited information THOUGHT that their mus'haf is complete/others are not etc. is because they are the most detached people from the Qur'an. Allah has punished the nation of the Rafidah with being complete losers. Yes, they claim to follow the Qur'an and the 'Itra, however ponder over this, let's start with the 'Itra:
the 'Itra, allegedly 12 super-humans (with the last one being made up by a a gang of four fallible thieves, wallahi I can't believe how a sane person can even believe in that), superior than all Prophets (practicially, often even than the final Messenger even if they deny it), who are nowhere mentioned in the Qur'an (yet way more "inferior" guides such as Ibrahim are not just mentioned in the Qur'an but are being set as examples that MUST be followed!) "guided" the Ummah for around 250 years. 250 years is approx how long 11 out of 12 lived, and the Rafidah ascribe all sorts of contradictions to them in the name of Taqiyyah, so their narrations are a mess/confusion on top of it it is an insult to suggest that Allah reserved 11 (!) "infallibles" for a period of just 250 years, and the last one is for over 1200 now in occultation guiding absolutely nobody and nothing (hence Rafidah resort to dream of their Ayatollats and/or laymen who claim to have seen him or to philosophical crap such as their Mahdi being like the sun behind the cloud blah blah. What an insult to the sun behind the cloud which provides us with warmth, yet the Rafidi Mahdi provides nothing, he i.e. his imaginary existence is in fact a burden on Shiites themselves who are being stripped of their wealth in the name of khums and the sahm of the hidden Imam by the Ayatollat clergy).
So where is the 'Itra now? WELL in occultation, there goes following to 'Itra to actually following Iranian Ayatullats who can't even recite a Surah Al-Fatiha with correct Tajwid (love this line from the ANTI-MAJOS brothers). So there you go, in reality they have no infallible to guide them
2. As for the Qur'an: The Rafidah are the most humiliated people when it comes to the Qur'an, I remember as an Ex-Shia seeing Zaydis, Ibadhis, heck even Qadyanis having a closer relationship to the Qur'an than the Rafidah in general. This is not an over exaggeration it is a fact for everybody who used to be a Shia or is familiar with Shia societies. One excuse my Shia mates always brought up back in the past was the following:
"True, Sunnis are masters of Tajwid, Makhaarij etc. and Shia Ayatollats and most laymen (except some Shia Qaris who are ironically presented as miracles in Iran for memorising the Qur'an. Masakeen don't know that such "miracles" are to be found on every street corner in Somalia, Yemen, Saudi, Pakistan i.e. SUNNi nations) are an embarrassment, however Shia ponder more over the Qur'an."
Wallahi, I could never accept such a deluded and wishful thinking. Just check the Tafasir books of the Rafidah. They are so much filled with Tahrif and Batini-lunatic tafasir (every fruit and sea and what not represents Ali etc. and the cow is 'Aisha, and the beast is 'Ali, and the bees are the Imams, just lunacy), in fact their TOP tafsir books (by Qummi, 'Ayashi etc.) are so embarrassing that the Rafidah have never even bothered to translate them in several languages, yet they are busy translating the books by an Ex-Sufi Tunisian (whose book got all refuted by the way, including in my native tongue) Tijani in dozens of languages. In fact it is the Sunnis who have the most sound, non-Batini/esoterical and sound tafsir hence they did not shy away to translate Ibn Kathirs and Tabari's ENTIRE Tafsirs in English and several other languages.
Anyway, where is the Qur'an to the Rafidah anyway? In the worst case (like how many of their past scholars and some today believe) it is a mess, verses were removed and misplaced by the Sahabah. In the best case (which is still tahreef) the Qur'an has all the verses as in the time of the Prophet (SAWS) but it is a riddle i.e. the verses are all misplaced by the Sahaba (like the Shaytan Allatyari and many of their modern day scholars say) like the verse of tathir which of course supports the SUNNI view that wives ARE part of the Ahl Al-Bayt. Those Rafidah who know Arabic know that very well so they claim that 'Othman (RA) put that verse there to distort verse 33:33
So what Qur'an and 'Itra have these losers have? They have nothing. The Qur'an they put in their living room was compiled by the Sahaba not their Imams, the same Sahabah who narrated the Qur'an have narrated the Sunnah, but the Rafidah have nothing whatsoever, this is why they misunderstand the most simple difference between tahrif of Qur'an in Shi'ism and the narrations about abrogation etc.
They have no real Qur'an, cause (even to the most moderate Shia view) the Qur'an with its DIVINE Tafsir is with the hidden Imam. So we are lacking a divine Tafsir!
No 'Itra available and an 'Othmani (an accursed usurper to Rafidah) on their bookshelves, that's what the Rafidah have.
-
I want to know insh'Allah.
Why Ibn Abbas use interrogative form ?
Here
Narrated `Ikrima:
Ibn `Abbas said, "How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about their Books while you have Allah's Book (the Qur'an) which is the most recent of the Books revealed by Allah, and you read it in its pure undistorted form?"
And Here
Narrated Ubaidullah bin `Abdullah bin `Utba:
Ibn `Abbas said, "O Muslims? How do you ask the people of the Scriptures, though your Book (i.e. the Qur'an) which was revealed to His Prophet is the most recent information from Allah and you recite it, the Book that has not been distorted? Allah has revealed to you that the people of the scriptures have changed with their own hands what was revealed to them and they have said (as regards their changed Scriptures): This is from Allah, in order to get some worldly benefit thereby." Ibn `Abbas added: "Isn't the knowledge revealed to you sufficient to prevent you from asking them? By Allah I have never seen any one of them asking (Muslims) about what has been revealed to you."
Because I have rather the impression he affirm the tahreef. contraty to here.
Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn `Abbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Qur'an) which has been revealed to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!"
-
Wallahi, I could never accept such a deluded and wishful thinking. Just check the Tafasir books of the Rafidah. They are so much filled with Tahrif and Batini-lunatic tafasir (every fruit and sea and what not represents Ali etc. and the cow is 'Aisha, and the beast is 'Ali, and the bees are the Imams, just lunacy), in fact their TOP tafsir books (by Qummi, 'Ayashi etc.) are so embarrassing that the Rafidah have never even bothered to translate them in several languages, yet they are busy translating the books by an Ex-Sufi Tunisian (whose book got all refuted by the way, including in my native tongue) Tijani in dozens of languages. In fact it is the Sunnis who have the most sound, non-Batini/esoterical and sound tafsir hence they did not shy away to translate Ibn Kathirs and Tabari's ENTIRE Tafsirs in English and several other languages.
Deserves of a standing ovation!
I have made mention of this to Shias in person, on their forums, in their mosques and elsewhere but it falls upon deaf ears.
For those who live in Washington DC metropolitan area, I can list names of Shia mosques that have on-site and online libraries (or both) and every single one of them features "Then I Was Guided" in many languages but they do not have one complete collection of Al-Kafi in English. There is a Shia mosque that has Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim on its shelves in multiple languages but not even a book with the most basic hadiths from Al-Kafi. The only thing they have is "Nahjul Balagha" (a chainless book) and Tafseer Mizan (Arabic only).
-
Salam.
Please how Ibn Abbas can says " is an error from the scribe" because he was not aware of another recitation while He said that in Muslim:
In Saheeh Muslim #1355, Ibn Abbas narrates that the Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam) kept asking Jibreel to add more to the recitation of the Qur’an until he reached seven variations. In Tafseer al-Tabari Ibn Shihab says: “I heard that these seven ways are always related to one matter and do not differ in Halal or Haram.”
?
Barak'Allah ou fikoum.
-
In fact how we can conceal this sentence :
Ibn Abbas said, “I think this may be a mistake from the scribe,” suggesting that he is unsure if it is a recitation or not.
And this:
In Saheeh Muslim #1355, Ibn Abbas narrates that the Prophet (salalahu alaihi wa salam) kept asking Jibreel to add more to the recitation of the Qur’an until he reached seven variations.
?
-
how we can imagine Ibn Abbas and Aisha, 20 years after the death of the messenger (saws) , were not aware of the authenticity of the opposing recitation ?
-
^
Maybe Ustad Farid can explain this matter further, but we read in fact a good number of discussions among the Sahabah like between Ayesha and Ibn Abbas (RAA) concerning the meaning and application of many Ayaat.
Also, the formal way to know what a particular Sahabi considered to be Quran is through the Qurra whom that Sahabi taught, not through the single narrations, which are in any case interpreted through the standard (i.e. through what they taught to their students as Quran, this is one issue for example that comes up also with Abu Dardaa (RAA) and his reading, Ibn Mas'ud (RAA) and his reading, and it is a matter of Usool beyond that of what we read in the Ahadeeth).
-
how we can imagine Ibn Abbas and Aisha, 20 years after the death of the messenger (saws) , were not aware of the authenticity of the opposing recitation ?
It is natural to not know all the recitations. Remember, knowing or reciting narrations aren't obligatory in the first place. A better question to ask would be: How were they not aware of some rulings (i.e. mutah)?
-
Salam.
I understand the fact that Scipt error is not thareff. It 's as if I do a orthograph mistake in my curriculum vitae. That don't means I do the tahreff of it.
So I would like summerize what I have understood about the fact that Ibn Abbas and Aisha were not aware of the authenticity of the opposing recitation . (Because I think it's very important)
-1-Either Ayesah and Ibn Abbas read a recitation abrogated by the messenger saws which was not included in the othman scritp.
-2- Or Ayesha and Ibn Abbas read an authentic recitation but it was not included in othman scritp who had deleted some authentic recitation.
-3- Or Ayesha, Ibn Abbas read the authentic recitation but seing the "strange" orthograph of the othman script (accordind to them) they have interpreted that like an another unknow recitation.
-4- There is an another explanation that I have not grasped
Ustad Farid, what do you think about my view of your last paragraph?
It's relevent or absolutly not?
-
#2 makes sense to me. I did not understand #3 though.
-
#2 makes sense to me. I did not understand #3 though.
For #3 it's "subbtle".
I think Ibn Abbas and Ayesah were accustomed to read their recitations with their own script which were their own tools.
But When the Uthmani script was here.
The Uthmani script was different compared to usual scripts that Ayesha and Ibn Abbas were accustomed.
Why? Because the Utmani Script needed to gathered maximun of recitations from sahaba. And that had an impact upon the ultimate script of Othman and above all upon its orthography!
Then when Ayesha and Ibn Abbas had seen the otmani script . I think they were disturbed by this orthography which was adjusted for Many recitations not for their specifics recitation (of ayesha and Ibn Abbas).
So I think it's possible that, they knew the recitations included in the othmani script. And I think may be the othman script gathered the recitation of Ayesha and Ibn Abbas. But like they were not accustomed to this script they have interpreted this script like an another recitation.
I think may be the orthography has disturbed them. But their recitation was included in othman script.
For summarize, I think it's because they had not "tamed" the othamni script that they thought that the othmani script were an another recitation. while not.
If I'm clear what do you think about this view?
-
I see. I still think #2 is the best possibility to be honest.
-
Saha aidkoume.
Is there a method to determine when something was narrated by a companion? Like this one?
Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn `Abbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Qur'an) which has been revealed to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!"
Narrated `Ikrima:
Ibn `Abbas said, "How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about their Books while you have Allah's Book (the Qur'an) which is the most recent of the Books revealed by Allah, and you read it in its pure undistorted form?"
Narrated Ubaidullah bin `Abdullah bin `Utba:
Ibn `Abbas said, "O Muslims? How do you ask the people of the Scriptures, though your Book (i.e. the Qur'an) which was revealed to His Prophet is the most recent information from Allah and you recite it, the Book that has not been distorted? Allah has revealed to you that the people of the scriptures have changed with their own hands what was revealed to them and they have said (as regards their changed Scriptures): This is from Allah, in order to get some worldly benefit thereby." Ibn `Abbas added: "Isn't the knowledge revealed to you sufficient to prevent you from asking them? By Allah I have never seen any one of them asking (Muslims) about what has been revealed to you."
You know if Ibn Abbas talked about the the book of Allah in general way or if he refered to the Othmani Script?
-
The preservation of the Qur'an in the heart of Ibn Abbas does not require a script in the first place, as you are aware.
However, it can also be argued that some of the recitations are through Ibn Abbas, and do not have words like "tasta'thino" or "wa wasa", which could suggest that Ibn Abbas did ultimately accept the Uthmanic script.
This scenario is very likely as well.
-
So for summarize the evolution of the view of Ibn Abbas .
- First, he was "supprised" by Othmani Script and he said it's an script error because he was not aware of another recitations.
Then he has seen his recitation was abrogated by the otmani script.
And finally he did accept the Uthmanic script, because he has learnt the qu'ran through the another authentic recitation of Ubay Ibn Kaab and Zayd Ibn Thabit and finnaly he has accepted to taught an another authentic recitation.
And he has concluded saying:
Narrated Ubaidullah:
Ibn `Abbas said, "Why do you ask the people of the scripture about anything while your Book (Qur'an) which has been revealed to Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) is newer and the latest? You read it pure, undistorted and unchanged, and Allah has told you that the people of the scripture (Jews and Christians) changed their scripture and distorted it, and wrote the scripture with their own hands and said, 'It is from Allah,' to sell it for a little gain. Does not the knowledge which has come to you prevent you from asking them about anything? No, by Allah, we have never seen any man from them asking you regarding what has been revealed to you!"
Narrated `Ikrima:
Ibn `Abbas said, "How can you ask the people of the Scriptures about their Books while you have Allah's Book (the Qur'an) which is the most recent of the Books revealed by Allah, and you read it in its pure undistorted form?"
Narrated Ubaidullah bin `Abdullah bin `Utba:
Ibn `Abbas said, "O Muslims? How do you ask the people of the Scriptures, though your Book (i.e. the Qur'an) which was revealed to His Prophet is the most recent information from Allah and you recite it, the Book that has not been distorted? Allah has revealed to you that the people of the scriptures have changed with their own hands what was revealed to them and they have said (as regards their changed Scriptures): This is from Allah, in order to get some worldly benefit thereby." Ibn `Abbas added: "Isn't the knowledge revealed to you sufficient to prevent you from asking them? By Allah I have never seen any one of them asking (Muslims) about what has been revealed to you."
That's is how I see,chronogycally, the evolution of his view about the othmani script.
And may be it's like that we can reconciled the fact that he believed about the preservation of the qu'ran in his heart and above all in the utmani script.
You think it's accurate?
-
You know if Ibn Abbas talked about the the book of Allah in general way or if he refered to the Othmani Script?
No, sorry but that was why I was interested in the timing of when this was said. If this incident happened after the other narrations then it doesn't even matter. But I don't think that there is a method of knowing what precedes what
-
You know if Ibn Abbas talked about the the book of Allah in general way or if he refered to the Othmani Script?
No, sorry but that was why I was interested in the timing of when this was said. If this incident happened after the other narrations then it doesn't even matter. But I don't think that there is a method of knowing what precedes what
Yes effectively I think we also can say that may be the claim of Ibn Abbas about the scirbe errors was chronologicaly after all his orhers hadith about the Qu'ran.
Because may be he has learnt the Qu'ran through Zayd and Ubay during many years and after He has seen the Uthmani Scrit he was not aware of another authentic recitation from Utham, Ali or Ibn Massaud.
Or
He has learnt one way of reciation from Zayd And Ubay but both knew another recitations. And Ibn Abbas don't knew it. (even if I don't know if we can say that)
It's a big headhache. : = )