Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims

 

Corruption and Distortion (Tahreef) in the Quran


By Amar Khan

08 April, 2009

 


 

 

Contents

  1. Introduction

  2. Corruption in Shia Narrations

  3. Sunni Reports about Additions in the Quran

  4. Sunni Reports about Deletions from the Quran

  5. Sunni Reports about Mistakes and Changes in the Quran

  6. Corruption in the Quran Claimed by Ahle Sunnah Ulemas


 



1.  Introduction


In the Quran, Allah makes this emphatic promise:

Verily, we have sent down the Reminder, and, verily, we will guard it [Q15:9].

Despite almighty Allah's vacuous promise to protect the originality of the Quran, it is substantially corrupted. And it is interesting that all Islamic Schools also accept this fact in the way that the Sunnis blame the Shias for corrupting the Koran, while the Shias blame the Sunni for the same. In reality, both Shia and Sunni books have narrations regarding corruption and editing of the Koran. Previously, I had written an article regarding corruptions in the Quran. Over recent the weeks, I have expanded my research on the Quranic corruptions and distortion and have compiled the outcome of my research into this E-book. I believe my research findings, as presented here, will end debates or counter-claims against the fact that the Koran has been corrupted and distorted to a significant extent from its original version. After this reading E-book, Muslims will ever be able to say that the current Quran is the pristine, uncorrupted, words of Allah as revealed to Prophet Muhammad.

 




2.  Shia hadiths on distortions in the Quran
 

First group of hadith about Tahreef

The first group of hadiths are those that contain the word “Tahreef” in them. Here we see first one from Al Kafi:

“It has been narrated from Ali Ibn Suweed that Imam Musa Kazim [as] was in prison when I wrote a letter to him. The Imam [as] replied to it and amidst his reply he wrote this sentence: “They were declared Ameen over the book of Allah but they have committed Tahreef and made changes to it”

We see another hadith, belonging to this group, which has been recorded by Ibn Shehr Ashob in 'Manaqib'. The sermon of Imam Hussain, delivered on the day of Ashura, has been recorded in the following manner.

“No doubt you are counted amongst those people from the ummah of my grandfather who are disobedient and rebellious, who have left the bounds determined by Allah, who have thrown away the Book of Allah, and talk with the satanic intuition. Verily you are amongst the same people whose faces are black on account of your sins and have committed the dangerous crime of making Tahreef with the Book of Allah”.


Second Group of hadith about Tahreef

The second group of hadiths are those that suggest that the names of Imams of Ahlulbait [as] were present in the Quran but were deleted at a later date.

We read in Al-Kafi [Vol. 1, p.417, Hadith 26] regarding the verse 2:23:

'Jabir said: Gebrail revealed this verse to Muhammad in this manner: 'And if you are in doubt as to that which We have revealed in favor of Ali to Our servant, then produce a chapter like it.''

In a second tradition of this group of hadiths, Abu Baseer narrated the revelation of the verse 33:71 from Imam Jafar Sadiq in the following manner [Al-Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 414]:

Abu Abdullah [as] said: 'Allah almighty said: 'and whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger in the guardianship of Ali and the Imams after him, he indeed achieves a mighty success'. It was revealed in this manner.'

A third tradition of this group, as records Al-Kafi, has been narrated by Manhal from Imam Jaffar Sadiq [as] the verse 4:47 was revealed in the following manner:

Abu Abdullah said: 'Gabriel (as) revealed upon Muhammad (s) this verse: 'O you who have been given the Book! believe that which We have revealed in Ali's favor a clear light'.'

It has been narrated on the authority of Asbagh bin Nabata that Ameer al Momineen [as] said: One part of the Quran is about us Ahlebayt and our friends, and another part is about incidents and traditions while one part is about obligations and instructions.”

We also read in Tafseer al Ayashi that Imam Jaffar Sadiq [as] said [p. 17, Hadith 4]:

“If the Quran were recited in the manner in which it was revealed then our name(s) would have appeared in it.


The third group of hadith about Tahreef

This group contain hadiths that demonstrate Tahreef in Quran in respect of additions or deletions.

First Hadith [Tafseer Al Ayashi, p. 13, Hadith 6]:

“Narrated from Mesar that Imam Baqar [as] said: Had additions and deletions not been made in then Quran then our right would not have been hidden from those who possess minds. When the Qaim [as] rises, the Quran shall endorse every sentence uttered from his tongue.”

Second Hadith [Usole kafi 1:228]:

Jabir reported that he heard Imam Baqir saying: 'No one can claim that he has compiled the Quran as Allah revealed except a liar. The only person to compile it and memorise it according to its revelation was Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Imams who succeeded him.

http://www.allaahuakbar.net/shiites/shiite_belief_that_the_present_Quran_is_fabricated.htm

Kulyani narrates the following statement, which he attributes to Imam Baqir:

"None among mankind but a great liar claims that he has compiled the whole Qur'an as it was revealed. No one compiled it nor memorized it as Allah revealed it, but Ali Bin Abi Talib and the Imams after him."

http://www.kr-hcy.com/shia/books/majlisulama/part2.shtml

Third Hadith [Al-Kafi, Vol. 1 p. 13, Hadith 4; Basair al Darjaat, p. 213, Hadith 1]:

Imam Baqar [as] said: 'Other than the actual successors of the Holy Prophet [s] no one can claim that he possesses the Quran with its internal and external meanings.'


The fourth Group of Hadith about Tahreef

This group comprises of those traditions that suggest that the names of some men and women were mentioned in the Quran but were deleted later on.

First Hadith [Tafseer al Ayashi, Vol 1: p. 12: Hadith 10]:

Imam Jaffar Sadiq [as] said: “The Quran contains the incidents of the past and future and it contained the names of some men which were deleted from it and one name was mentioned in many Surahs which on one knows except the actual successors of Holy Prophet [s].

Second Hadith [Al Kafi, Vol 2: p. 613: Hadith 16]:

Baznati narrates that Imam Raza [as] gave me a Quran and asked me not to see it, but I opened it and recited the first verse of Surah Baina. I found the names of 70 people from the Quraish along with their father’s names. The Imam [as] asked me to return the Quran to him.

Third Hadith [Thawaab al A`maal, p. 100; Bihar al Anwar, Vol 92: p. 50]:

Abdullah bin Sanan narrated from Imam Jaffar [as] that said:Surah Ahzab contained the blemishes of men and women from the Quraish and non Quraish. O son of Sanaan this Surah alone used to expose the wrong deeds of the women of Quraish and it was lengthier than Surah Baqra but Tahreef and deletion was made to it”
 

The fifth Group of Hadith about Tahreef

This group of hadiths contains those hadiths relating to a certain form of recitations [Qirat] that have been attributed to Imams [as].

One such tradition is where a man recited the verse 33 of Surah An'am before Amir al-Momineen [as] in this manner:

33. QAD NAAALAMU INNAHU LAYAHZUNUKA ALLATHEE YAQOOLOONA FA-INNAHUM LA YUKATHTHIBOONAKA WALAKINNA ALTHTHALIMEENA BI-AYATI ALLAHI YAJHADOONA.

http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/Quran/transliteration/006.html

Umran bin Maytham narrated that Abu Abdullah said: 'A man recited to Ameer al Momineen (as) '{but surely they do not call you a liar but the unjust deny the communications of Allah}'. He (Imam Ali) said: 'By Allah they called him liar, but the verse (Yukathiboonaka) is not to be pronounced emphatically means that they cannot bring falsehood to reject your truthfulness'. [Al-Kafi, Vol 8: p. 200–241]

Muhammad bin Suleman narrates from some Sahaba who from Imam Abul Hassan [as]:
We hear some verses that have never been heard before from the Quran. Moreover we cannot recite [ do qirat] in such a beautiful manner as you do, so are we sinners? The Imam replied: No you are not sinners but you recite the Quran in the manner in which you have been taught and soon there will come a person to teach you.” [Usool al-Kafi, Vol 2: p. 453]



3.  Sunni reports about additions in Quran


Ibn Abbas testified to fifty verses being added to the Quran of Uthman

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti has recorded a tradition from Ibn Abbas wherein he says [Tafseer Al Itqan fi Uloom al Quran, Vol 1: p. 84]:

The number of verses in the Quran are 6616.


Disagreement amongst Sunni scholars over the number of Quranic verses

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti, whilst citing Sunni scholarly opinion from Sunni scholar Uthman bin Saeed bin Uthman Abu Amro al-Daani (d. 444 H), wrote [Al-Itqan fi Uloom al-Quran, Vol 1: p. 84]:

Al-Daani said: ‘They agreed that the number of verses of Quran are six thousand but they disagreed in what has been added further (to the Quran), some of them didn't add more whilst others said it was two hundred and four. Some said two hundred and fourteen, others said two hundred and nineteen. Some said two hundred and twenty five, others said two hundred and thirty six.’

According to Imam of Nawasib Ibn Kathir, 6000 verses are authentic the remainder are doubtful

To evidence this we have relied on the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah.

Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Volume 1 page 7, number of verses
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 1 page 65, number of verses

We read in Tafseer Ibn Kathir:

“The total number of verses Quranic verses are 6000. Disagreement remains about the remainder verses. There are various views and statements about them. One statement is that there are 6204 verses”

The Hanafi and Maliki belief that “Bismillah al-Rehman al-Rahim” is not a part of the Quran

Abu Huraira narrated that the prophet said: 'If anyone recited (Surah) al-Hamd, he shall recite 'Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim' because it is the head of Quran, the head of the book and the Sab'e al-Mathani (seven verses) and 'Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim' is part of its verses' [Kanz al-Ummal, Vol 7: p. 437: Tradition 19665]

Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani declared it 'Sahih' in Talkhis al-Habir, Vol 1: p. 233.

Let us also see the testimony of Amir al-Momineen, Ali bin Abi Talib, as recorded by Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti in Al-Itqan, Vol 1: p. 136]:

Someone asked Ali: 'What is Sab'e al-Mathani (Seven Verses)?' He replied: 'It is Sura Al-Hamd'. The man said: 'Sura Al-Hamd consists of six verses'. He replied: ''Bismillah Al-Rehman -Al-Rahim' is also one verse'.

About the famed Hanafi and Maliki belief regarding 'Bismillah' we have relied on the following valued books of Ahle Sunnah.

Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 1 page 3 by Qazi Sanaullah Paani Patti
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 1 page 92, Muqqadmah Tafseer
Tafseer Fatah al Qadeer, Volume 1 page 7 by Qazi Shokani
Tafseer Khazin, Volume 1 page 12, Muqqadmah
Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Volume 1 page 20, Farid Book Depot, Dehli
Tafseer Ahkaam al Quran al Jasaas
Noor al Anwar , page 9
Tafseer Kabeer, Volume 1 page 151
Tafseer Madarik , Volume 1 page 13
Tafseer Kashaf, Volume 1 page 1 by Allamah Zamakhshari
Umdatul Qari Shrah Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1 page 12

We read in Tafseer Ibn Kathir:

“On the other hand, Malik, Abu Hanifah and their followers said that Bismillah is not an Ayah in Al-Fatihah or any other Surah.”

We read in Tafseer Khazin:

“Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik and Imam Auzai attested that neither is “Bismillah” a part of surah Fatihah, nor of any other surah of the Quran.”

We read in Tafseer Kabeer:

While Abu Hanifa may Allah's mercy be upon him said: 'Bismillah is not a verse of it'

According to Imam Shaffiyee “Bismillah Al Rehman Al-Rahim” is a part and a verse of Holy Quran and since whoever rejects even a single letter of the Quran is Kaafir then doesn’t this mean that Imam Abu Hanifa was Kaafir according to Shafiyee teachings? Does it not mean that all Hanafis are infidels in the eyes of Shafiyees?

We read in Noor al Anwar:

“One who rejects that “Bismillah” is a part of the Quran should not be deemed a Kaafir when that rejection is on account of doubt. There is disagreement on this issue in the view of Imam Malik as he didn’t deem it to be a part of the Quran.”

Other than the month of Ramadhan, “Bismillah” shouldn’t be recited in any prayer neither on one's heart nor loudly.

Imam Fakhruddin Razi writes in Tafseer Kabeer, Volume 1 page 151:

“Imam Malik and Auzai may Allah be pleased with both of them said: 'It (Bismillah) isn’t a part of the Quran except Surah Naml and that other than in Ramadhan, it should not be recited, neither in ones heart nor aloud.”

The Ulema of Ahle Sunnah believed that the sole reason that “Bismillah” was written in the Quran was to make a distance between the texts and to earn a blessing.

We read in Tafseer Kashaf [Volume 1, page 1]:

“The jurists and the Qura of Madina, Basrah and Sham believed that "Bismillah Al-Rahman Al-Raheem " was not a part of Surah al-Fatiha nor from the Quran . It was written in the Quran so as to keep a distance between the suras (chapters) and to earn blessings by commencing with it, as is the case when one commences any action. [The stance] deeming it not to be a part of Quran was the madhab of Imam Abu Hanifa and his followers and for that it is not recited loudly by them during prayers.”

We also read in Tafseer Kashaf:

“And the Quran readers of Makka and Kufa believed that it [bismillah] is a verse from [Surah] Fatihah and every Surat and this was maintained by Imam Shafiyee and his followers and due to that, they read it loudly.”

Uthman’s own confession about his ignorance on the issue of Bismillah being a part of Surah Bara’t

We are quoting from the following Sunni books.

Tafseer Gharaib al Quran, Volume 2 page 57
Tafseer Kabeer, Volume 4 page 294
Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Volume 3 page 331
Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 4 page 32
Tafseer Mualam al Tanzeel, Volume 3 page 410
Tafseer Khazin, Volume 3 page 46
Tafseer Ruh al Mani, Volume 9 page 41
Sahih Tirmidhi, Volume 2 page 368

We read in Tirmidhi:

“The Holy Prophet [s] died without informing us whether this (Surah Bar’at) was a part of that (Surah Anfaal) or not”

Imam of Ahle Sunnah, Imam Malik, said that “Bismillah” is not written at the beginning of Surah Bara’t, because when the first part of Surah Bar'at was lost the “Bismillah” was also lost along with it whilst Uthman stated that the Prophet [s] didn’t tell them whether or not Sura Bar'at was a part of Surah Anfaal. Uthman has indirectly admitted that he adopted Qiyas when he was unsure. Here we see a major contradiction between two great figures of Ahle Sunnah.

According to the Sahabi Abdullah Ibn Masud, Surah Fatiha is not a part of Quran

  • Tafseer Qurtubi, Vol 1: p.15 & Vol 19: p.151
  • Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 1 page 2
  • Tafseer Kabeer page 176
  • Tafseer Al Itqan, Volume 1 page 80
  • Tafseer Fatah al-Qadeer, Volume 1 page 15

We read in Tafseer Fatah al-Qadeer:

Abdullah bin Masud would not write Fateha as part of the Quran, he said: ‘If I wrote it then I would have to write it at the beginning of every thing.’

Imam Ibn Hajr Asqalani writes in Fatah al Bari, Volume 8, page 571:

“There is an ijma amongst Muslims over Fatihah and Mauzatain being a part of the Quran and whoever rejects them is a Kaafir”

Further evidence of Ibn Masud rejecting Surah Fatihah as being a part of the Quran

We are quoting from the following Sunni books.

Al Itqan fi Uloom al Quran, Volume 1 page 99
Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Volume 1 page 9
Tafseer Fatah al Qadeer, Volume 1 page 6 by Allamah Shokani
Tafseer al-Kabeer, Volume 1 page 218

We read in Tafseer al-Kabeer:

“In some of the previous books it is written that Ibn Masud would reject Surah Fatihah and Mu'awwidh-at [Mauzatain] as being a part of the Quran.”

Ibn Masud rejected Mu'awwidh-at / Mauzatain [Surah Naas & Surah Falaq] as a being part of the Quran

We are quoting from the following esteemed work of Ahle Sunnah:

Sahih Bukhari Volume 6 Hadith 501
Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page 743, kitab al tafseer
Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 6 page 416
Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Volume 4 page 571
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 2 page 251
Tafseer Ruh al Mani, Volume1 page 279
Sharah Mawafiq, page 679

We read in Sahih Bukhari [Volume 6 Hadith 501]:

Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:
I asked Ubai bin Ka'b, "O Abu AlMundhir! Your brother, Ibn Mas'ud said so-and-so (i.e., the two Mu'awwidh-at do not belong to the Quran)." Ubai said, "I asked Allah's Apostle about them, and he said, 'They have been revealed to me, and I have recited them (as a part of the Quran)," So Ubai added, "So we say as Allah's Apostle has said."

We read in Fatah al-Bari:

Al-Masnad, Al-Tabarani and Ibn Mardaweyh from the way of Al-A'mash from Abi Ishaq from Abd al Rahman bin Yazid Al-Nakhe’i, who said: "Abdullah Ibn Masud used to erase Al Ma'uzatayn from his Mushafs and say that they (Ma'uzatain) aren't from Quran.”

Online Fath al-Bari, Kitab Tafseer al Quran

We read in the esteemed Sunni work Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 1 page 53 that:

“The status of Mauzatain is the same as the status of Baqra and Aal-Imran, whoever claims that it is not part of Quran is a kafir”

Ibn Masud did not record Surah Fatihah (Al-Hamd) and Mu'awwidh in his Mushaf

Allamah Jalauddin Suyuti whilst citing Ibn Ashtah records in his esteemed book Tafseer Al Itqan [Vol 1: p. 173:

“The sequence of Suras in Ibn Masud’s mushaf was in this manner:
Al Itwaal, Al Baqrah, Al Nisa, Aal e Imran...Al Kauthar, Qul Ya Ahu hal Kafirun, Tubat, Qul ho Allah ho Ahad and Alig wow Ra, Alif Laam Meem Nashrah and Al-Hamd and Mazuatain were not there in it” 

The rejection of Mu'awwidh-at by Ibn Masud is proven from Sahih texts

Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page 74
Tafseer Al Itqan (Urdu), Volume 1 page 212
Al Bidayah wal Nihayah , Volume 8 page 357
Majma al-Zawaid, Volume 7 page 311 Tradition 11562

All these books evidence beyond reasonable doubt Ibn Masud’s rejections of two Quranic Surahs. We shall now cite the view of Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti from Al Itqan (published by Idaara Islamiyah, Lahore):

“Abdullah bin Ahmed in a book ‘Ziaraat al Musnad’ and Tabarani and Ibn Marjah following A’mash through Abi Ishaq, Abdul Rehman Bin Yazid Nukh’ei narrated: “Abdullah Ibn Masud used to erase Mauzatain from his mushaf and would attest that both of these verses are not a part of the Quran”. And Bazar and Tabarani at another place have narrated from the same narrator that: “Abdullah Ibn Masud would write and erase Mauztain from his copies of the Quran and would state that the Holy Prophet [s] had only instructed him to use these Surahs as Taweez and Abdullah Ibn Masud did not recite these Surahs”. All the chains of this narration are Sahih”.

Similarly Imam Abi Bakar al-Haythami records in Majma al-Zawaid:

Abdulrahman bin Yazid al-Nakhaei said: Abdullah (Ibn Masud) used to erase Muwaztain from his Mushaf and say: ‘It is not a part of Allah's book’. It is narrated by Abdullah bin Ahmad and Tabarani, the narrators of Abdullah are the narrators of the Sahih and Tabarani's narrators are authentic (Thuqat)”

The companions believed that words have been added in Surah Lail and its endorsement by Imam Bukhari

We read in Sahih Bukhari 6:60:468:

Narrated Ibrahim:
The companions of 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) came to Abu Darda', (and before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and found them. Then he asked them: 'Who among you can recite (Qur'an) as 'Abdullah recites it?" They replied, "All of us." He asked, "Who among you knows it by heart?" They pointed at 'Alqama. Then he asked Alqama. "How did you hear 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud reciting Surat Al-Lail (The Night)?" Alqama recited:
'By the male and the female.' Abu Ad-Darda said, "I testify that I heard the Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want me to recite it:--
'And by Him Who created male and female.' but by Allah, I will not follow them."

Unlike the followers of Abdullah Ibn Masud, Alqama and Abu Ad-Darda, all Muslims today read in Surat Al-Lail (The Night) verse No. 3:

وَمَا خَلَقَ الذَّكَرَ وَالْأُنثَى
And Him Who hath created male and female [Pickthal 92:3].

Compare this recital to that offered by Ibn Masud’s followers, Alqama and the testimony of Abu Ad-Darda, whose recital included these words 'By the male and the female’ (والذكر والأنثى).

The tradition recorded by Imam Bukhari in his ‘Sahih’ indirectly persuades his adherents to erase the extra words 'Him Who created' from this verse since the companions heard the Prophet recite it with the words ‘By the male and the female’. This tradition clearly highlights belief in the distortion of the Quran.

The Mushaf of Sahabi Ubai bin Ka'b did not have a word that the present Quran contains

We read in Surah Nisa, verse 101:

And when you journey in the earth, there is no blame on you if you shorten the prayer, if you fear that those who disbelieve will cause you distress, surely the unbelievers are your open enemy. [Shakir 4:101]

[WA-ITHA DARABTUM FEE AL-ARDI FALAYSA AAALAYKUM JUNAHUN AN TAQSUROO MINA ALSSALATI IN KHIFTUM AN YAFTINAKUMU ALLATHEENA KAFAROO INNA ALKAFIREENA KANOO LAKUM AAADUWWAN MUBEENAN]

We read in Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 2, page 210:

Ibn Jarir and ibn al-Munder recorded that Ubai used to recite the verse '{if you shorten the prayer, if you fear that those who disbelieve will cause you distress} without reciting '{if you fear}'while in Uthman's Mushaf its '{if you fear that those who disbelieve will cause you distress}'
[Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Surah Nisa, Verse 101]

This Sunni tradition clearly demonstrates that additions have been made to the Quran by Uthman while accordong to the belief of Sahabi Ubai bin Kaab the words 'if you fear' (IN KHIFTUM) are not the part of this verse.




5.  Sunni reports about deletions from the Quran


The Quran have 40 parts

We have relied on the following authentic books of Ahle Sunnah

Fatah al Bari, Volume 9 page 95 by Ibn Hajar Asqalani
Umdatul Qari, Volume 9 page 345 by Badruddin Aini
Irshad al Saari, Volume 7 page 482 by Shahabuddin Qastalani

We read in Fatah al-Bari that:

“The least that is enough of reading Quran is to read every day and night one Juz amongst the 40 Juza of Quran”

Sunni belief that Quran had ninety Juz; 700369 letters are missing

We will quote from the following valued books of Ahle Sunnah.

Kanz al Umaal, Volume 1 page 135 Hadith 2308
Al Itqan, fi Uloom al Quran Volume 1 page 88 by Jalaluddin Suyuti
Jama’ al-Sagheer, Volume 2 page 88, Chapter: alif laam

We read in 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 [s], but in that case the number of Juz/Parahs would jet up to ninety.

We should also point out that the narrators of Tabrani are reliable according to Ahle Sunnah. Dahabi in his Mizan without advancing any proof and logic has maligned Tabrani’s teacher Muhammad bin Ubaid for citing such narrations that evidences blatant unprofessional conduct on his part.

Sunni scholars believed that letters have been lost from the actual Quran

Let us commence by citing the proud statement of Al Hafid Jalaluddin Suyuti in the preface of his esteemed book Dur al-Manthur:

“Praise be to Allah.... who has given me the ability to conduct a commentary of his Great Book based on what I have received of the transmitted reports with high valued chains”.

In the Muqaddamah of Surah Ahzab, Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti records the belief of Imam Sufiyan al-Thawri (d. 161 H) narrated from his student Imam Abd al Razzak al Sanani (d. 211 A. H.):

“Abd al Razaq narrated from Al-Thawri that he said: ‘I have come to know that people from the Sahaba of the Prophet [s] who used to recite the Quran were killed on the day of Musaylama and with their deaths letters from the Quran were lost.’”


The Nasibi belief that Umar decided to compile Quran when he found that a verse had been lost with the death of a person who knew it.

We read in Kanz ul Ummal, Volume 2 page 574:

Umar bin al-Khatab asked about a verse of Allah's book, they answered: 'It was with a man who got killed on day of Yamama (battle)'. He (Umar) said: 'We all shall return to Allah'. Then he ordered to collect the Quran, therefore he was the first one who collected it in one book.

The tradition is clear that the verse of the Quran Umar was looking for was lost with the death of a person who knew it; and in Sahih Bukhari, we read that the very fear of loosing the Quran due to the deaths of Qur'a made Umar to compile it in a book form!


Most of the Quran has been lost

In order to quote the statement of Abdullah Ibn Umar we have sought reliance upon the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah:

Tafseer Dur e Manthur Volume 1 page 106
Tafseer Itqan (Urdu), Volume 2 page 64
Tafseer Ruh al Mani, Volume 1 page 25
Fadhael al-Quran by Qasim bin Salam, Volume 2 page 135

One of the early Sunni scholars Qasim bin Salam (d. 222 H) records:

Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayub from Naf’ee from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Verily among you people one would say that he has found the Quran whilst he is unaware of what the total quantity of the Quran was, because most of the Quran has been lost rather one should say that verily he has found the Quran that has appeared.’

Ismail bin Ibrahim: Dahabi said: ‘Hujja’ (Al-Kashif, v1 p242), Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p90). Ayub al-Sekhtiani: Dahabi said:‘The master of scholars’ (Siar alam alnubala, v6 p15), Ibn Hajar said:‘Thiqah Thabt Hujja’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v1 p116). Naf’ee: Dahabi said:‘The Imam of Tabayeen’ (Al-Kashif, v2 p315), Ibn Hajar said: ‘Thiqah Thabt’ (Taqrib al-Tahdib, v2 p239).


The testimony of Imam Malik that most of Surah Bar’at has been lost along with ‘Bismillah’

We have relied on the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah to prove this:

Tafseer Fath al Qadeer, Volume 2 page 317, Surah Bara`t
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 8 page 62, Surah Bara`t
Tafseer Itqan, Volume 1 page 81
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 3 page 208, Surah Bara`t
Al Muhazraat, Volume 2 page 434

We read in Fath al-Qadeer:

“When the first part of Surah Bar’at was lost, Imam Malik said that ‘Bismillah’ was also lost along with it”

We read in Tafseer Qurtubi:

“Malik said among what had been narrated by Ibn Wahb and Ibn Al Qasim and Ibn Abdul Hakam is that when the first part of Surat Bara'at was lost, ‘Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem’ was also lost along with it. It has also been narrated from Ibn Ajlan that he heard that Surat Bara'at was equal to the length of Surat Al Baqarah or approximately equal to it, so the part was gone and because of that "Bismillah Al Rahman Al Raheem" wasn't written between them (between the lost and the remaining part) .”


The testimony of Sahabi Hudaifah that only one-fourth of Surah Bar’at remains

Allamah Jalaludin Suyuti whilst quoting scholars like Tabrani, Hakim and Ibn Shebah writes [Tafseer Dur e-Manthur, Volume 3, page 208]:

“Huzaifah narrated that the Surah which you call Taubah is actually Surah ‘Azaab [wrath] and you just recite one fourth of what we used to recite.”

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti has very confidently recorded the traditions mentioning that Surah Bar'at was equal to Surah Baqarah in length. At present, Surah Baqarah contains 286 verses whilst Surah Bar'at contains 129. If Surah Bar'at was really equal to the length of Surah Barqah that would mean approximately 157 verses have been lost from Surah Ba'rat.
 

Prophet's companions did not believe in the completeness of the Quran as they attested to numerous verses being lost from Surah Ahzab

We have relied on the following authentic Sunni books to prove this:

Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Volume 4 page 465, Surah Ahzab
Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Volume 5 page 180 , Surah Ahzab
Tafseer Itqan, Volume 2 page 30
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 7 page 113, Surah Ahzab
Tafseer Fath al Qadeer, Volume 4 page 251, Surah Ahzab
Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 7 page 302, Surah Ahzab
Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani, page 121 parah 21
Tafseer Kashaf, Volume 2 page 204, Surah Ahzab
Tafseer Gharaib al-Quran, Volume 7 page 75
Tafseer Madarik al-Tanzeel, Volume 3 page 48, Surah Ahzab
Al Muhazraat, Volume 4 page 434 by Raghib al-Isfahani
The testimony of the companion Ubai bin Ka'b

We read in Tafseer Dur e-Manthur:

“Ubai bin Ka’ab inquired of someone: 'How many verses were there in the chapter of al-Ahzab?' He replied, '72 or 73 verses.' Ubai bin Ka'b then said: ‘I had seen this Surah more or equal to Surah Baqarah”‏

The testimony of Umar

We also read in Tafseer Dur e-Manthur:

“Ibn Mardawayh narrated from Huzaifah that Umar said that Surah Ahzab was equal to Surah Baqrah (in length)”


Aisha clearly believed in the incompleteness of Quran

We read in Tafseer Ruh al-Mani:

“Aisha narrates: "During the life of the the Prophet (s), Surah Ahzab was read with 200 verses, when Uthman collected the verses, he could get along with more verses than this.”

We also read in Tafseer Qurtubi:

“Aisha narrates: ‘Surah Ahzab contained 200 verses during the lifetime of Prophet [s] but when the Quran was collected we only found the amount that can be found in the present Quran".

This tragedy happened due to Uthman but it seems that the author of this tafseer lacked sufficient courage to cite his name.

We also read in Dur al-Manthur:

“Aisha narrated that during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet [s] 200 verses were recited in Surah Ahzab but when Uthman collected the Mushaf, he only succeeded in locating the present number of verses”

Aisha’s explicit statement suggests that Uthman was unsuccessful in locating a large number of verses that were present during the lifetime of Muhammad. It isn’t a small statement. According to Aisha, the Muslims of today have been deprived of a large number of verses that were in existence during the time of Muhammad. Aisha was fully aware of the seriousness of this statement; and in it, we do not find any evidence that the ‘lost’ verses were abrogated.


Sunni belief that a Surah equal to the length of Sura Bar’at has been lost as endorsed by Imam Muslim and Hakim

We have relied on the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah.

Sahih Muslim [English] Book 005, Number 2286
Jama’ al Usool, Volume 3 page 53, chapter 2 part 3 Hadith 972
Mustadrak al Hakim, Volume 2 page 224, Kitab al Tafseer
Al Muhazhirat, Volume 3 page 433
Tafseer Ruh al Mani, Volume 2 page25
Mu’jam al Zawaid, Volume 7 page 140
Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 1 page 105 , verse of abrogation

We read in Sahih Muslim 5.2286:

Abu Harb b. Abu al-Aswad reported on the authority of his father that Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the reciters of Basra. They came to him and they were three hundred in number. They recited the Qur'an and he said: You are the best among the inhabitants of Basra, for you are the reciters among them. So continue to recite it. (But bear in mind) that your reciting for a long time may not harden your hearts as were hardened the hearts of those before you. We used to recite a surah which resembled in length and severity to (Surah) Bara'at . I have, however, forgotten it with the exception of this which I remember out of it: " If there were two valleys full of riches, for the son of Adam, he would long for a third valley, and nothing would fill the stomach of the son of Adam but dust."…

In Jamai al-Usool, we read the testimony of Abi Ka'ab, a companion of Muhammad, who was the first Imam of Taraweeh prayers appointed by Umar:

“Ubai bin Ka'b narrates: “The Prophet[s] said that he had been ordered to recite the Quran amongst us and the Quran which He[s] had recited also contained the following verse:
“Should a son of Adam own two valleys full of wealth, he should seek a third valley and nothing would fill Ibn Adam's abdomen but the soil”.

We read in Al-Muhazraat:

“Abdullah Ibn Masud had this in his mushaf:
“Should a son of Adam own two valleys full of wealth, he should seek a third valley and nothing would fill Ibn Adam's abdomen but the soil”
.

Similarly al-Hakim in his book, Al-Mustadrak, in the section of commentary on the Quran (Vol 2, p. 224), reported that Ubai Ibn Kaab said that the Messenger of God said to him:

“Certainly the Almighty commanded me to read the Quran before you, and he read "The unbelievers from the people of the Book and Should Ibn Adam ask for a valley full of wealth and I grant it to him, he would ask for another valley. And if I grant him that, he would ask for a third valley. Nothing would fill the abdomen of Ibn Adam except the soil. God accepts the repentance of anyone who repents. The religion in the eyes of God is the Hanafiyah (Islam) rather than Yahudiyya (Judaism) or Nasraniya (Christianity). Whoever does good, his goodness will not be denied."

Al-Hakim wrote: “This is an authentic Hadith.” Al-Dhahabi also considered it authentic in his commentary on al-Mustadrak.

When,

  • Al-Hakim said this is authentic according to the standards of the two Sheikhs (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)
  • Al-Dhahabi also considered it authentic in his Commentary of Al-Mustadrak, vol 2, pages 225-226,
  • Muslim report similarly to this from Abu Musa Ash'ari.
  • Anas bin Malik also testified to the lost verse of Ibn Adam as recorded in Al-Musanaf, by Abdulrazaq, v10, p436,

then what will be the conclusion?

Thus, it is up to Nawasib to rule on the fate of the above Sahaba before attacking Shias. Those, who claim that anyone who has recorded a tradition which implies the incompleteness of the Quran is a Kafir, should first issue this Fatwa against beloved Gurus Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, al-Hakim & Co since they testified to such absurd traditions being authentic and named their books as "Sahih"!

Two Surahs, namely Surah Hafd and Surah Khul’a, written in the Quran of Ubai bin Ka'b, missing from the current Quran

According to Sunni sources there were two surahs, which were part of that Quran according to the testimonies of the Sahaba and Tabayeen. One of them was Surah Khula:

God, we ask help from You and we ask repentance from You.
And we praise You, and we will not be infidels, and we remove and we leave who are dissolute (Unrestrained by Your laws).

The other was Surah Hafd:

God its You Who we worship, and for You we pray and prostrate,
and we curry favor with You and we rush for Your obedience, and we hope for Your mercy, and we are afraid from Your anger,
Your suffer is purchasing the infidels."

Both of these Surahs were part of a copy of the Quran possessed by the Sahabi Ubai bin Kaab, and were read in the following Sunni books:

Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 4 page 421
Tafseer al Itqan (Urdu), Volume 1 page 172-173
Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, Volume 1 page 25

We read in Al-Itqan [(Urdu), Vol 1. p.172-173]:

“The sequence of surahs in Ubai bin Ka’ab’s mushaf was in this manner:
[1]Al Hamd, [2]Al Baqrah, [3 ]Aal e Imran, [4]Al-An'am, [5]Al-Ar`af, [6]…[94] At-Takathur, [95]Al-Qadr, [96]Surat al Khul’a, [97] Surat al Haqd, [98]…”


Surah Khul’a and Surah Hafd were a part of Ibn Masud’s Mushaf

We read in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Vol 8, p. 696:

“Ubaid narrates that he came to know that these two are the surahs from the Quran and are written in the mushaf of Ibn Masud”


Umar used to recite Surah Khula and Surah Hafd in his prayers

We read in Tafseer al Itqan (Urdu), Vol 1, p. 175:

Umar Ibn al Khattab did Qunut after Ruku [bowing] and recited:
In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
God, we ask help from You and we ask repentance from You.
And we praise You, and we will not be infidels, and we remove and we leave who are dissolute (Unrestrained by Your laws).

Itqan fi Uloom al-Quran, Vol 1, p. 77:

In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
God its You Who we worship , and for You we pray and prostrate ,
and we curry favor with You and we rush for Your obedience , and we hope for Your mercy , and we are afraid from Your anger ,
Your suffer is purchasing the infidels ."


Ibn Abbas had written Surah Khul’a and Surah Haqd in his Quran

We are quoting from the following Sunni books.

Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 6 page 421
Itqan fi Uloom al-Quran, Volume 1 page 77

We read in Al Itqan:

In the Mushaf (Quran) of Ibn Abbas the recital of Abi and Abi Musa was in this manner:

i.e “God, we ask help from you and we ask repentance from You.
We praise You, We will not be infidels, and we remove and we leave who are dissolute (Unrestrained by Your laws).

And this [Itqan fi Uloom al-Quran (Urdu), Vol 1, p. 175 & Vol 1, p. 77]:

God its You Who we praise, and for You we pray and prostrate,
and we curry favor with You and we rush for Your obedience,
We are afraid from Your anger, and we hope for Your mercy
Your suffer is purchasing the infidels."


Umaya bin Abdullah would recite both Surahs in his prayers

In Itqan [Vol 1, p. 77], we read that a Tabayee, namely Umaya bin Abdullah (d. 87 H), used to recite both of these Surahs in his prayers:

Tabrani with Sahih chain has narrated from Ibn Ishaq that he said: “In Khurasan Umaya bin Abdullah bin Khalid bin Usaid did imamate for us in prayers and recited both of these Surahs: ‘INNA NASTA3INUKA WA NASTAGHFIRUKA’


The Sahabi Ibn Masud’s testimony that Ali’s name was mentioned in Quran, but deleted out by Uthman

We read in Holy Quran:

[Shakir 5:67] O Messenger! Deliver what has been revealed to you from your Lord; and if you do it not, then you have not delivered His message, and Allah will protect you from the people; surely Allah will not guide the unbelieving people.

We have relied on the following esteemed Sunni Tafseers of the above mentioned verse.

Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 2 page 297, Surah Maidah verse 67
Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, Volume 9 page 193
Tafseer Fatah al Qadeer, Volume 2 page 57, Surah Maidah verse 67
Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 3 page 353 published by Daar ul Ishat Karachi

We read in Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani:

“Hafiz Ahmed bin Musa bin Mardawayh has narrated with his isnad from Abdullah Ibn Masud that: "During the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (s) we used to recite this verse as:
"O Apostle! Deliver what has been sent down to you from your Lord; 'that 'Ali is the Maula of the Momineen', if you don't…."

Ibn Masud’s testimony that Ali’s name was mentioned in Surah Ahzab as well.

[Shakir 33:25] And Allah turned back the unbelievers in their rage; they did not obtain any advantage, and Allah sufficed the believers in fighting; and Allah is Strong, Mighty.

We have relied on the following esteemed Sunni Tafseers of above mentioned verse:

Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 5 page 192, Surah Ahzab verse 25
Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, page 157, chapter 21, verse 25
Ma'arij al Nabuwat by Moin Kashifi, Volume 1 page 163

Allamah Alusi writes in Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani:

Ibn Mardawayh narrated from Ibn Masud that: “We used to recite this verse as: "and enough was Allah for the believers in their fight 'via Ali ibn Abi Talib'.”

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti writes in Dur al-Manthur:

“Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Mardawayh and Ibn Asakir have narrated from Abdullah Ibn Masud that: “We used to recite this verse in the following manner: “and enough was Allah for the believers in their fight 'via Ali ibn Abi Talib.”


Ibn Masud’s testimony that the term, “Aal e-Muhammad”, was also present in the Quran after the term “Aal e-Imran

We read in the Quran:

[Shakir 3:33] Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran above the nations.

[INNA ALLAHA ISTAFA ADAMA WANOOHAN WAALA IBRAHEEMA WAALA AAIMRANA AAALA ALAAALAMEENA]

Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdullah al-Kaeni from Abu al-Hassan bin Uthman bin al-Hassan al-Nusaibi from Abu Bakr Muhammad bin al-Hussain bin Saleh al-Subaei from Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Saeed from Ahmad bin Maytham bin Abi Naeem from Abu Janad al-Saloli from al-Amash from Abu Wael that he said: ‘I read in Abdullah ibn Masud's Mushaf: { Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran and descendants of Muhammad above the nations.}’

Thalabi recorded in his Tafsir from al-Amash from Abi Wael that he said: 'I read in Abullah ibn Masud's book: 'The family of Abraham, and the family of Imran and the family of Muhammad above all people''

Shaqiq said: ‘I read in Abdullah ibn Masud's Mushaf ‘{Surely Allah chose Adam and Nuh and the descendants of Ibrahim and the descendants of Imran and descendants of Muhammad above the nations.}’

Imam Abu Hayan Andlasi also records in Tafsir Bahar al-Muheet, Vol 2, p. 203:

وقرأ عبد الله : وآل محمد على العالمين

Abdullah used to recite: 'The descendants of Muhammad above all people'


Imam Bukhari’s & Muslim’s enforcement of a tradition pointing to the incompleteness of the Quran

We have relied on the most reliable work of Ahle Sunnah.

Sahih Bukhari, Book of Tafseer (Commentry on Quran)
Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page 506, Hadith 3771
Sahih Muslim, Book 001, Number 0406 [English]
Sahih Ibn Haban, Volume 14 page 487
Al-Sunnan al-Kubra, by Bayhaqi, Volume 9 page 7

We read in Sahih al Bukhari (Arabic), Book of Tafseer, Hadith 5023:

Narrated Ibn Abbas:
When the Verse:--'And warn your tribe of near-kindred, and thy group of selected people among them’ was revealed the Prophet ascended the Safe (mountain) and started calling "O Bani Fihr! O Bani 'Adi!" addressing various tribes of Quraish till they were assembled. Those who could not come themselves, sent their messengers to see what was there. Abu Lahab and other people from Quraish came and the Prophet then said, "Suppose I told you that there is an (enemy)…” [Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 293]

Ibn Abbas has used the words, “and thy group of selected people among them”, along with the words ‏"And warn your tribe of near-kindred”, which haven’t been mentioned in the English version of Sahih Bukhari. The translator has committed Tahreef in order to hide the belief in Tahreef of the Quran that would expose his Imam Bukhari or if we adopt the definition of Taqqiyah we can safely say that the translator practiced Taqiyah in this case.

The words “‏And warn your tribe of near-kindred” can be read in Holy Quran [verse 26:214] but the former, i.e. “and thy group of selected people among them”, which (according to Sunni sources) had been revealed along with “And warn your tribe of near-kindred” cannot be found in this verse nor any where else in the Quran. Hence the statement of Ibn Abbas proves that those words were also a part of this verse and same view has been endorsed by Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim who included these words from Ibn Abbas in their ‘Sahih’.


Nasibi belief endorsed by Bukhari & Muslim: Some words, which were recited by the Prophet and Sahaba have been deleted from Surah Kahf

Presently we have got the following words in the verses 79 and 80 of Surah Kahf [trs. Sakir]:

As for the boat, it belonged to (some) poor men who worked on the river and I wished that I should damage it, and there was behind them a king who seized every boat by force.
And as for the boy, his parents were believers and we feared lest he should make disobedience and ingratitude to come upon them.

We are quoting from the following prestigious books of Ahle Sunnah.

Sahih Bukhari [Arabic], Book of Tafseer, Hadith Number 4772
Sahih Muslim [English], Book 030, Number 5865
Sunan Tirmidhi [Arabic], Volume 11 page 427 Hadith 3442
Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, Volume 4 page 227, Surah Kehf verse 79
Tafseer Tabari, Surah Kehf verse 79
Mustadrak al Hakim, Volume 2 page 244 Hadith 2959
Tafseer Fath al Qadeer, Volume 3 page 305
Al-Tamhid by Ibn Abdulbar, Volume 4 page 278
Tafseer al-Qurtubi, Volume 11 page 22

We read in Sahih Bukhari (Arabic), Book of Tafseer, Hadith Number 4772:

“….Saeed bin Jubayr narrated that Ibn Abbas used to recite:
'And in front (ahead) of them there was a king who used to seize every serviceablev boat by force. [18.79] and used to recite: “and as for the boy he was a disbeliever and his parents were believers” [18.80]

Imam Tirmidhi recorded same thing and has declared the tradition to be ‘Hasan Sahih’:
Sunan Tirmidhi [Arabic], Vol 11, p 427, Hadith 3442:

Note: The English translator of Sahih Bukhari 6:60:251 had no other option than to put the word ‘serviceable’ within brackets, so that the naïve readers may not see this tradition as the one showing Ibn Abbas' belief of Tahreef in the Quran.

Regarding the belief of the Sahabi Ubai bin Kaab about these two verses, we read in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur [Surah Kehf, verse 79]:

“Ubai bin Ka'b used to recite the cited verse as follows:
‘for there was after them a certain king who seized on every serviceable boat by force’ [YA/KHUTHU KULLA SAFEENATIN SALEHATGHASBAN].”

We also read in Tafseer al-Tabari:

Al-Hasan bin Yahya said that Abdul Razzak told us that Muammar narrated from Qatadah that in Ibn Mas'ud's writings the verse was in this manner: ‘for there was after them a certain king who seized on every serviceable boat by force’.

We read in Sahih Muslim:

Sa'id b. jubair used to recite (verses 79 and 80 of Sura Kahf) in this way: There was before them a king who used to seize every boat by force which was in order, the boy was an unbeliever.

Now the answer of the question as to why these esteem people used to recite these two verses in this manner is that these verses were revealed in the very manner from Muhammad as Imam Hakim records into the following tradition, which has been declared ‘Sahih’ by him [Mustadrak al-Hakim, Volume 7, page 85, Hadith 2913]:

Ibn Abbas stated: The Holy Prophet used to recite: ‘for there was after them a certain king who seized on every serviceable boat by force’.


The belief of Sipah-e-Sahaba and other Nawasib: An alteration has taken place in Surah Talaq

We read in Surah Talaq:

[Yusufali 65:1] O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce them at their prescribed periods,…

But when we read authentic text of Nawasib, we come to know that people, whom they regard highly, used to recite this verse with words that cannot be found in the present Quran:

"O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce them in the beginning their prescribed periods”

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti records this fact from the most authentic sources of Ahle Sunnah in his Tafseer of the cited verse:

Malik and Shafiyee, Abdurazzaq in Al-Musnaf, Ahmad, Abd bin Hamid, Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, Al Tirmidi, Al Nisa'i, Ibn Majah , Ibn Jurir, Ibn al Munzer, Abu Ya'la Ibn Mardawah and Al Bayhaqi in his Sunan narrated from Ibn Omar that he divorced his wife while she was in her period and Rasulollah [s] was informed about this and He[s] got angry and said : "Let him go to her and hold her until she ends her period, then if he wished he can divorce her a pure divorce before he touches her because this is the "Iddat" that God ordered how the women will be divorced and then prophet [s] recited: "O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce them in the beginning their prescribed periods”

We also read:

“Ibn Mardawah narrated from Abi-l-Zubayr who from Ibn Umar that, during the time of the Prophet [s] he divorced his wife while she was in her period, so Omar went to the Prophet and mentioned the same to him [s] on which He [s] said: "Order him to go to her and hold her until she ends her period then he can divorce her if he wished" Thus Allah revealed "O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce themin the beginning their prescribed periods”
Abi-l-Zubayr said: I heard Ibn Umar reciting it like this.”

We further read:

Abdul Razzaq and Abd bin Hamid and Al Tabarani and Ibn Mardaweh narrated from Mujahid [ra] that he said: One day a man asked Ibn Abbas: O Aba Abbas! I divorced my wife 3 times" So Ibn Abbas said: "You didn't obey your God and made your woman haram on you and you haven’t been pious so that God makes for you a vent, one of you will divorce . Then he said: "O Aba Abbas! God has said: "O Prophet! When ye do divorce women, divorce them in the beginning their prescribed periods” , And like this Ibn Abbas used to recite this verse .
From Online Tafseer Dur e-Manthur.

In order to gauge the primary Sunni sources that contain the above stance of Ibn Abbas, once can consult:

al-Mujam al-Kabir, by Tabarani, Volume 11 page 73
Sharh Ma'ani al-Athaar, by Ibn Salamah, Volume 3 page 58
Al-Sunnan al-Kubra, by Nisai, Volume 6 page 493
Sunnan al-Darqutni, Volume 4 page 11

Whilst quoting this episode again, we would like to present the online versions of this incident briefly remove any Nawasib confusion so that they can recognize how their Imams recorded traditions in their “Sahih” texts, which clearly show that the verse [65:1] in the present Quran is not same as it that which was recited by the Holy Prophet [s] and his Sahaba.

We read in Sahih Muslim [Book of Divorce, # 3489]:

“… Ibn 'Umar (Allah be pleased with them) said that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) then recited this verse:" O Apostle, when you divorce women, divorce them at the commencement of their prescribed period" (Ixv 1).

We read in Sunan Abu Daud [Book of Divorce, # 2180]:

“…The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) recited the Qur'anic verse: O Prophet, when you divorce women, divorce them in the beginning of their waiting period."

The Arabic versions of both these traditions can be read at the following sites, respectively, so that the difference between two versions of verse may become clear.

Online Sahih Muslim [Arabic] Hadith # 3743
Online Sunan Abu Daud [Arabic] Hadith 2187


Further proof from Bukhari about Tahrif in the Quran

We read in Holy Quran:

[Shakir 2:198] There is no blame on you in seeking bounty from your Lord, so when you hasten on from "Arafat",

We have relied on the following most prestigious work of Ahle Sunnah.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 6, Book 60, Number 44 [English]
Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page186 Chapter 34 Hadith 4519
Sunnan al-kubra, by Bayhaqi, Volume 4 page 333
Al-Mujam al-kabir, by Tabarani, Volume 11 page 93
Tafsir al-Tabari, Volume 2 page 389

We read in Sahih Bukhari:

Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
'Ukaz, Mijanna and Dhul-Majaz were markets during the Pre-islamic Period. They (i.e. Muslims) considered it a sin to trade there during the Hajj time (i.e. season), so this Verse was revealed:-- "There is no harm for you if you seek of the Bounty of your Lord during the Hajj season." (2.198)

As you can see the words “during the Hajj season” has been used in this hadith of Sahih Bukhari along with the words of verse 2:198 which we do not find the former in the present Quran. Imam Bukhari has recorded the testimony of Ibn Abbas [ra] that the cited verse was revealed in that precise manner.

Alteration in the verse of Mutah

The Quran we have in our hands have the verse in the following manner:

[Shakir 4:24] … Then as to those whom you profit by, give them their dowries as appointed; and there is no blame on you about what you mutually agree after what is appointed; surely Allah is Knowing, Wise.

In order to prove that the Sahaba and Tabayeen believed in some words to be the a part of this verse, we have relied on the following valued books of Ahle Sunnah:

Tafseer Durre Manthur, Volume 2 pages 140-141
Tafseer Tabari, Volume 5 pages 14-15
Tafseer Kabeer, Volume 3 page 94
Fatah al Qadeer, Volume 1 page 14
Tafseer Ibn Katheer, Volume 1 page 84
Tafseer Ruh al Maani, Volume 5 page 5
Tafseer Kashaf, Volume 1 page 20
Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 2 page 4
Tafseer Ahkam al Quran, Volume 2 page 47
Tafseer Mu'alim al Tanzeel, page 414
Mustadrak Al Hakim, volume 2 page 47
Al Musahif by Abi Bakr Sijistani, page 3
Tafseer Mawahib al Rahman, page 4 part 5
Tafseer Haqqani, Vol 2 page 3 (published in 1956, Deoband UP. India)
Tafseer Jama Al Bayan, Volume 1 page 66
Neel al Autar, Volume 6 page 53 Chapter: The abrogation of Nikah al-Mutah
Tafseer Qurtabi, Volume 5 page 30
Sharh Muwatta by Zarqani, Volume 1 page 54
Kitab al Musahaf, page 342
Al Bahar al Maheet, Volume 3 page 218
Maini al-Quran, Volume 2 page 61
Tafseer Manar, Volume 5 page 5
Sharh Sahih Muslim of al-Nawawi, Volume 9 page 179
Umdat al-Qari Shrah Sahih Bukhari, Volume 18 page 208
Tafsir Thalabi, Volume 3 page 286
Tafsir Samarqandi v1 p320
Al-Ujab fi bayan al-asbab by Ibn Hajar, Volume 2 page 858

We read in Al-Mustadrak:

“Narrated from Ibn Abbas that he would read this verse with the words: “Then as to those whom you profit by, for a prescribed period..”

Imam Hakim declared the tradition to be Sahih as per the grading conditions set by Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim whilst Imam Dhahabi in his margin of ‘Mustadrak’ deemed it Sahih on the conditions of Imam Muslim. Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records [Tafseer Durre Manthur, Volume 2 pages 140-141]:

Narrated Abed bin Hamid, ibn Jarir, al-Anbari in his book al-Musahif and al-Hakim and he declared the chain as Sahih from Abi Nadhra who said: ‘I recited before Ibn Abbas ‘ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers’. Ibn Abbas said: ‘ye derive benefit from them for a prescribed period’. I said: ‘We don’t recite it like this’. Ibn Abbas said: ‘By Allah it was revealed like that.’

Beside Ibn Abbas, Ibn Masud, Ibn Jubayr and Ubai bin Ka'ab, many other prominent figures also recited the verse with the words ‘for a prescribed period’ and that includes Al-Sedi (Tafseer Tabari v5,p18; Tafseer Ibn Kathir v1,p486), Talha bin Musraf (Tafsir Thalabi v3,p286) and Muqatil (Tafsir Samarqandi v1,p320, Al-Ujab fi bayan al-asbab by Ibn Hajar v2 p858).

The testimony of the Sahaba proves that the words “for a prescribed period” were also there in Quran in the verse of Mutah; and, if that was indeed the case, then it proves that Uthman committed blatant transgression by deleting these words from the Quran, which could only be to suppress news of the open secret about the Caliph’s daughter Asma Bin Abu Bakr who practiced Mutah.


Umar’s opposition to Allah’s words by prohibiting Mutah

If Nawasib are going to play their usual ‘abrogation game’ then they need to prove the abrogation of the words “for a prescribed period” through Mutawatir narrations and also show us the abrogating verse.

The mothers of the believers and other Sahaba did not believe in the present Quran, and suggested that verse 2:238 had been tampered with.

We read in the Quran 2:238:

[Shakir] Attend constantly to prayers and to the middle prayer and stand up truly obedient to Allah.

[HAFITHOO AAALA ALSSALAWATI WAALSSALATI ALWUSTA WAQOOMOO LILLAHI QANITEENA]

Regarding the testimony of Aisha about Tahreef beving taken place in the verse under discussion, we are using following prestigious books of Ahle Sunnah as proof:

Sahih Muslim Book 004, Number 1316 [English]
Al Musahif by Abi Bakr Sijistani page 94
Tafseer Dur al Manthur Volume 1, page 302, Surah Baqrah Verse 230
Tafseer al-Tabari, Volume 3 page 348
Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page 197 Hadith 4522
Musnad Ahmad, Volume 6 page 73
Sunnan Abi Dawoud, Volume 1 page 102
Sunnan Termidi, Volume 4 page 285
Sunnan Nisai, Volume 1 page 236
Sunnan al-Kubra, by Bayhaqi, Volume 1 page 462
Sharh Ma'ani al-athaar, by ibn Salamah, Volume 1 page 172

Sahih Muslim:

Abu Yunus, the freed slave of 'A'isha said: 'A'isha ordered me to transcribe a copy of the Qur'an for her and said: When you reach this verse: "Guard the prayers and the middle prayer" (ii. 238), inform me; so when I reached it, I informed her and she gave me dictation (like this): Guard the prayers and the middle prayer and the afternoon prayer, and stand up truly obedient to Allah. ' A'isha said: This is what I have heard from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).

Note: The words, “and the afternoon prayer” [WASALAT AL ASR], cannot be found in the verse 2:238 in the Quran compiled by Uthman.

If Nawasib are still not satisfied, then allow us to advance the words of a star from the ‘Farooq’ family from the following esteemed Sunni books:

Sahih Ibn Haban, Volume 14 page 228
Sunnan al-Kubra, by Bayhaqi, Volume 1 page 462
Sharh Ma'ani al-Athaar, by ibn Salamah, Volume 1 page 172
vTafseer Tabari, Volume 2 page 764
Tafseer Dur al Manthur Volume 1 page 302

Let us quote from Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, wherein Suyuti has recorded the narration from various high ranking primary sources [Volume 1, page 721]:

Abu Rafee the slave of Hafsa said: ‘Hafsa ordered me to write a Mushaf for her and said: ‘Come to me when you come across this verse so that I dictate it to you in the manner that I learnt it. Then when I came across the verse ‘{Guard the prayers}’ she said: ‘Write‘{Guard the prayers and the middle prayer and the afternoon prayer}’’

We would also like to advance the words of Prophet's wife Umme Salama recorded in “Al Musahif” authored by Sunni scholar Abi Bakr Sajistani, the son of the author of Sunan Abu Daud:

“Umro Bin Rafa` narrates: “Umme Salama asked me to write a Mushaf for her and she asked me to inform her when I arrived at the verse “HAFITHOO AAALA ALSSALAWATI WAALSSALATI ALWUSTA”. Therefore when I reached this verse I informed her about it and she made me write this verse with the words “ASALAT AL ASR” after the words “WASALAT AL WAST”.

Similar things have also been recorded from Ibn Abbas (Sunan al-Kubra by Bayhaqi, v1:p463 & Tafseer Tabari, v2:p764) and from the Sahabi al-Bara bin Azeb (al-Mustadrak, v2:p281).

We have come to know that according to the wives of the Prophet, the verse is supposed to be:

Guard the prayers and the middle prayer and the afternoon prayer, and stand up truly obedient to Allah.

If Nawasib are going to bring their abrogation excuse here again to explain the words, ‘and the afternoon prayer’, could they kindly tell us why the wives of the Holy Prophet issued a special instruction to the writers to insert these ‘abrogated’ words in their respective Mushafs? We see that none of the said wives of Muhammad said anything to suggest that these additional words, they used in this verse, were abrogated; rather they all said: This is what I have heard from the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him).”

Aisha believed that the Quran compiled by Uthman was a victim of tahreef

We shall rely on the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah to prove this:

Tafseer Itqan (Urdu), Volume 2 page 65
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 5 page 220, verse of salutation
Al Musahif, page 95, Zikr Mushaf e Aisha

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti records in Tafseer Itqan [Volume 2 page 65]:

“Hameedah Bint Yunus narrates: “My father [Abi] who was 80 years old recited for me the verse of salutation from the Mushaf of Aisha with the following words:
i.e Allah and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and salute him with all respect. And on those who came to the first lines of prayers”
This verse was in this very manner before Uthman had made changes to the Quran.”

The verse in the present Quran is as follows [Yusufali 33:56]:

Allah and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.

We can see that, according to the Mushaf of Aisha, “And on those who came to the first lines of prayers” was the part of the verse [33:56], whilst Hameedah bin Yunus leveled a serious charge against Uthman by asserting ‘This verse was in this very manner before Uthman had made changes to the Quran’.

Umar did not believe that the word ‘and’ was a part of Surah Taubah, verse 100

We know that words like ‘and’ creates a huge difference in terms of meanings in general literature, the case is greater with the Holy Quran. Amazingly, we read that that in verse 100 of Surah Taubah, Umar was believed that “WA” that means ‘and’ was not a part of this verse, whilst it is in the present Quran. The verse in the present Quran is as follows:

WAALSSABIQOONA AL-AWWALOONA MINA ALMUHAJIREENA WAAL-ANSARI WAALLATHEENA ITTABAAAOOHUM BI-IHSANIN RADIYA ALLAHU AAANHUM WARADOO AAANHU WAAAAADDA LAHUM JANNATIN TAJREE TAHTAHA AL-ANHARU KHALIDEENA FEEHA ABADAN THALIKA ALFAWZU ALAAATHEEMU

Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records in Tafseer Dur e-Manthur:

Umar recited the verse 'WAALSSABIQOONA AL-AWWALOONA MINA ALMUHAJIREENA WAAL-ANSARI ALLATHEENA ATABAOUHEM BEAHSAN' and did not insert 'WA'[and] before 'ALLATHEENA'. Zaid bin Thabit told him that it was 'WAL WAALLATHEENA' whilst Umar said it was 'ALLATHEENA'. Zaid bin Thabit said: 'Umar knows better'. Umar then summoned Ubai Bin Kaab, who said:'Yes, its WAALLATHEENA'. Then Umar said: 'All right then recite it in this way.'

We also read that Umar was humiliated by another Sahabi Ubai, when discussing the cited verse. Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti records in Tafseer Dur e-Manthur, V3:p269, Surah Taubah verse 100:

“Umar recited the verse “WAALSSABIQOONA AL-AWWALOONA MINA ALMUHAJIREENA WAAL-ANSARI WAALLATHEENA” and did not insert “WA” before “ALLATHEENA”. Zaid bin Thabit told him that it was “WAL WAALLATHEENA” whilst Umar said it was “ALLATHEENA”. Zaid bin Thabit said: “Umar knows better”. Umar summoned Ubai bin Ka`b.Ubai told Umar:“Yes! I have taken this word in exactly the same way from the tongue of the Holy Prophet [s]”. Umar asked: “Have you really taken this word exactly from the Prophet’s tongue?” Abi got furious and replied: “By Allah! He [swt] revealed the Quran on Gebrial and Gebrail revealed it on the Prophet’s heart and Allah [swt] hasn’t taken suggestions from Khatab or from his son when revealing the Quran.”


Umar believed in a different version of Surah Fatihah

We have relied on the following esteemed works of Ahle Sunnah to prove this:

Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 1 page 15
Al Musahif, page 60 by Abi Bakr Sajistani

In the present Quran, Muslims read Surah Fatihah with the following words during prayers:

SIRATA ALLATHEENA ANAAAMTA AAALAYHIM GHAYRI ALMAGHDOOBI AAALAYHIM WALA ALDDALLEENA

But Ibn Khatab had his own version of Surah Fatihah. We read in Tafseer Dur al Manthur:

Al-Musahif, page 60:

“Umar would recite this verse as: “SIRATA MIN ANAAAMTA AAALAYHIM GHAYRI ALMAGHDOOBI AAALAYHIM WA GHAYRI WALA ALDDALLEENA”

We deem it a good apportunity to mention the author of Book ‘al Musahif’ Abdullah bin Sulaiman bin Al-Ashath bin Ishaq Al-Sejestani the son of Abu Dawood the author of Sunnan Abu Dawood. According to Darqatni he is Thiqa [Tadkerat Al-Hufaz v2 p771, Tarikh Baghdad v9 p468]. While Abu Hamed bin Asad Al-Maktib said: 'I never saw some one in knowledge than Abdullah bin Al-Ashath’ [Tarikh Baghdad v9 p465]. Imam Dhahabi also declared him Thiqa [Al-Siar fi Al'am Al-Nubala, v14 p505].


Nasibi belief in Tahrif: The words “WAL MUHAJIROON FI SABIL ILLAH” have been deleted from two places in the Quran

We read in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, V6: p92, Surah Hashr:

"A'mash states that in respect of Halal and Haram, the difference between the copies [Mushaf] of Abdullah Ibn Masud and Zaid Bin Thabit is that in Surah Infaal words 'And know that whatever thing you gain, a fifth of it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer' [Surah Infaal, verse 41] and in Surah Hashr words 'Whatever Allah has restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns, it is for Allah and for the Messenger, and for the near of kin and the orphans and the needy and the wayfarer and those who have left their homes in Allah's cause' [Surah Hashr, verse 7].

According to Ubai, the word ‘FIL WAADI’ is missing from the present Quran.

We read in Surah Aal e-Imran, verse 153:

“Behold! ye were climbing up the high ground”

ITH TUSAAIDOONA WALA TALWOONA AAALA AHADIN

We read in Tafseer Dur e-Manthur, Surah Aal e Imran, verse 153:

“Ibn Jarir said that Haroon stated that Abi Bin Kaab used to recite the cited verse as: “Behold! ye were climbing up the valley” [ITH TUSAAIDOONA FIL WAADI]”.

We do not find the word “FIL WAADI” in the present Quran. What is the Nasibi fatwa here? The narrators are yours, the books are yours, the author is yours, the translator is yours, the publisher is yours, so why this mulish attitude?

A letter has been added to the Mushaf of Uthman that was not in the Mushaf of Ibn Masud

We read in Surah Yusuf:

… وَفَوْقَ كُلِّ ذِي عِلْمٍ عَلِيمٌ

[Shakir 12:76] .. and above every one possessed of knowledge is the All-knowing one.

We read in Tafseer Ibn Kathir:

Abdullah bin Masud read the Ayah this way:
‘And above every scholar, is the All-Knower (Allah).’'

Do we need to comment any further here?


Sunni proof about tahrif in the 6th verse of Surah Ahzab

We read in the Holy Quran [Yusufali 33:6]:

The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers.

Ibn Jarir Tabari records in his esteemed commentary of Quran [Tradition 21597]:

“Bushr from Yazid from Sai'd from Qatadah that he said: Some used to recite: "The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers and he is their father".

We read in Tafsir Dur e Manthur, commentary of verse 6, Surah Ahzab:

“Abd ARazaq and Sa'eed Ibn Mansoor and Ishaq ibn Rahuwayh and Ibn Munzir and Al Bayhaqi have narrated from Bujalah that he said: Umar passed by a youth who was reading in a mushaf "The Prophet is closer to the Believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers and he is their father , so he (Umar) said: "Young boy talk about it". The youth then said: “This is the mushaf of Ubay (Ubay bin Ka`b)". So Umar went to Ubay and asked him about it (the addition) to which Ubay replied: "I used to be busy with the Quran whilst you were busy shopping in the markets."

Accompanying Ahle Sunna’s first Imam of Taraweeh prayers Ubai bin Ka’b, we have another prominent companion of Muhammad, Ibn Abbas, who likewise recited these words. Allamah Jalaluddin Suuti records [Tafsir Dur e Manthur, commentary of verse 6 Surah Ahzab]:

“Al Firyabi ‏and Ibn Mardaweyh and al Hakim and al Bayhaqi in his Sunan narrated from Ibn Abbas [ra] that he used to read this verse:"The prophet has more authority over the believers than themselve s and he is their father and his wives are their mothers."


A verse recited by Ubay bin Ka’b is absent in the Quran; Tahrif in Surah Fatah

We read in the Holy Quran [48:26]:

“When those who disbelieved harbored in their hearts (feelings of) disdain, the disdain of (the days of) ignorance, but Allah sent down His tranquillity on His Messenger and on the believers, and made them keep the word of guarding (against evil), and they were entitled to it and worthy of it; and Allah is Cognizant of all things.”

We read in the following authentic sources of Ahle Sunnah that Ubay bin K'ab, companion of the Holy Prophet, would recite some additional words to this verse.

Sunan Nisai Vol 6 page 463, No. 11505
Al Mustadrak al Hakim, Vol 2 page 225
Kanz ul Ummal Vol 2, No. 4815
Online Tafsir Dur al Manthur Vol 7, tafsir for surah fath

Sunan Nisai [Vol 10:No. 11441]:

Ibrahim Ibn Sa’eed narrated from Shebabah Ibn Suwar from Abdallah ibn Al’ala’ from Basr ibn Abdallah from Abi Idrees from Ubay ibn Ka’ab, that he read:

‘(48:26) When those who disbelieved harbored in their hearts (feelings of) disdain, the disdain of (the days of) ignorance, and if you had felt disdain like they felt, the masjid e haram would have been corrupted ’


According to Ibn Masud, Ibn Abbas & Ubai bin Kaab, a deletion of words has been committed in Surah Nisa verse 79

In order to prove that the Sahaba did not believe in the present form of this verse, we have relied on the following esteemed Sunni books:

Tafsir al-Sam'ani, Volume 1 page 451
Tafsir Qurtubi, Volume 5 page 286
Fateh al-Qadir, Volume 1 page 490
Ruh al-Ma'ani, Volume 5 page 90
Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 2 page 597

We read in Quran, 4:79:

Whatever benefit comes to you (O man!), it is from Allah, and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yourself.

But according to three great Sahaba namely Abdullah Ibn Masud, Ibn Abbas and Ubai bin Kaab the words ‘and I have recorded for you’ have been deleted from the verse. We read [Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, 2:597]:

Mujahid said: ‘According to Ubai bin Kaab and Ibn Masud's recitation its: ‘Whatever benefit comes to you (O man!), it is from Allah, and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yoursel, and I have recorded that about you.’

Similarly we read [Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, 2:597]:

Mujahid narrates that ibn Abbas used to recite: ‘Whatever benefit comes to you (O man!), it is from Allah, and whatever misfortune befalls you, it is from yourself, and I have recorded that about you’

So, according to these three esteemed Sahaba, the words, ‘and I have recorded that about you’, have been deleted from the version of the Quran we today have in our hands and as usual, the present day Nawasib have to choose between these three esteemed Sahaba and Uthman & Co. in order to attribute responsibility of committing Tahreef in the Quran, it was either:

  1. the above cited Sahaba who sinned by believing that the verse contained additional words not present in the Quran, or,
  2. it was Uthman & Co. who deleted these words and were hence guilty of committing Tahreef to the Quran.


The goat of Aisha ate the verses of suckling from the Quran

In order to back up our point, we have relied on the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah:

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3421
Sunan Ibn Majah, page 141, Book of suckling
Sunan Darqutni, page 500, Book of suckling
Hayat al Haiwan, Volume 4 page 463, Lughat Rawajan
Al Muhazraat, Volume 4 page 433
Tafseer Ruh al Mani, Volume 4 page 254

We read Sahih Muslim 8:3421:

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings and Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and it was before that time (found) in the Holy Qur'an (and recited by the Muslims).

Whilst there is not much different between the original Arabic words of the tradition and the official English translation, we would like to mention a more accurate English translation of the tradition:

“Aisha said: It had been revealed in the Quran that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated by five clear suckling, then Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) died and the verse was recited as part of Quran.”

We read the following words of Aisha in Sunan Ibn Majah, which has been declared ‘Hasan’ by Imam Nasiruddin Albaani [Sunan Ibn Majah [Arabic], Book of Suckling, # 2020]:

"When the verse of stoning and verse of suckling descended, they were written on a piece of paper and kept under my pillow. Following the demise of Prophet Muhammad (S) a goat ate the piece of paper whilst we were mourning."


Aisha and Umar believed in the lost verse of stoning and Umar's Taqiyya prevented him from adding it into the Quran

In this particular case, we are not going to dispute the abrogation of the verse of Rajam rather our sole concern will revolve around specifically to Aisha's and Umar's belief regarding the said verse, according to whom this verse was ‘lost’ after the death of Muhammad and not abrogated and therefore Umar intended to write this verse into Quran with his own hands.

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 8 & Volume 9
Sahih Muslim, Volume 2 page 42
Sunan Ibn Majah, page 182, kitab al hudood
Sunan Abu Daud, page 148, kitab al hudood
Musnad Ahmed bin Hanbal, Volume 1 page 274, Hadeeth 273
Tafseer Ibn Kathir, Volume 3 page 261, Surah Noor
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 5 page 880
Al Itqan fi Uloom al Quran, Volume 2 page 32
Al Muhazraat, Volume 4 page 423
Sunnan al-Kubra, by Bayhaqi, Volume 8 page 211
Musnad al-Shafiyee, page 164
Al-Musanaf, by Ibn Abi Shayba, Volume 6 page 553
Sunnan al-Kubra, by Nisai, Volume 4 page 273
Marifat al-Sunnan wa al-Athaar, by Bayhaqi, v6 p323
Tarikh Baghdad, Volume 3 page 190

We read in Sahih al-Bukhari 8:817:

“….'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:….. 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 Apostle 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…”

In another Hadith, which is narrated without any Hadith number in Bukhari, we read about the Taqiyyah practiced by Umar, wherein he failed to add those verses in Quran due to his fear of the people. This tradition is in the title of one of the chapter of Bukhari. Fortunately, it was translated by the translator. Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, Vol 9, p212-13, between Traditions 281 and 282:

(21) CHAPTER. If a judge has to witness in favor of a litigant when he is a judge or he had it before he became a judge (can he pass a judgment in his favor accordingly or should he refer the case to another judge before whom he would bear witness?). And the judge Shuraih said to a person who sought his witness, "Go to the ruler so that I may bear witness (before him) for you." And 'Ikrima said, "Umar said to 'Abdur-Rahman bin 'Auf, 'If I saw a man committing illegal sexual intercourse or theft, and you were the ruler (what would you do)?. 'Abdur-Rahman said, 'I would regard your witness as equal to the witness of any other man among the Muslims. 'Umar said, 'You have said the truth.' 'Umar added:
“If I were not afraid of the fact that people may say that 'Umar has added to the Qur'an extra (verses), I would have written the Verse al-Rajm (stoning to death of married adulterers) with my own hands…”

We should point out that according to the strange testimony of Imam Fakhruddin Razi, which we read in his book Al-Mahsool Vol3:p348, the verse Umar was wishing to add in the Quran was neither a part of the Quran nor was it an abrogated verse:

“I say that it wasn’t part of Quran and Umar's statement refer to it, he said: ‘If I were not afraid of the fact that people may say that Umar has added to the Qur'an extra (verses), I would have written the Verse al-Rajm (stoning to death of married adulterers) with my own hands’. If that was a Quran or was an abrogated (verse), he wouldn’t have said such thing.”

Anyhow, let us now read the unequivocal testimony of Umar that he believed the verse of stoning to have been ‘lost’ following the death of Prophet [Tafseer Dur e-Manthur, Muqadmah of Surah Ahzab]:

“Abd ul Razzak in Al Musannaf from Ibn Abbas said : Umar bin Al Khattab ordered a pesron to gather people for Salat of Jama'at, then he ascended on a pulpit, praised God and said: "O people! Do not get afraid about the verse of Al-Rajm because it is a verse that was revealed in the book of Allah and we recited it, but it was lost [Zahab] with much of the Quran gone with Muhammad and the proof of that is that the prophet [s] has stoned and Abu Bakr has stoned and I have stoned and there will come people from this nation who would deny the stoning.”

As for Aisha's belief regarding the verse of Rajam, we have already read that [Sunan Ibn Majah [Arabic], Book of Suckling, # 2020]:

"When the verse of stoning and verse of suckling descended, they were written on a piece of paper and kept under my pillow. Following the demise of Prophet Muhammad (S) a goat ate the piece of paper whilst we were mourning."

Let us again make one point very clear that in this particular case, we are not arguing whether or not the verse of stoning has been abrogated rather our sole motive in this case is to point out the belief of Tahreef in the Quran held by Umar and Aisha according to whom the verse of stoning is still a part of the Quran that went missing following the death of Prophet [s].




5.  Sunni reports about mistakes and changes in the Quran

According to Ibn Abbas there is a 'mistake' in Surah Ra’ad, because of the sleepy scribe:

We read in Quran [Shakir 13:31]:

And even if there were a Quran with which the mountains were made to pass away, or the earth were travelled over with it, or the dead were made to speak thereby; nay! the commandment is wholly Allah's, Have not yet those who believe known that if Allah please He would certainly guide all the people? And (as for) those who disbelieve, there will not cease to afflict them because of what they do a repelling calamity, or it will alight close by their abodes, until the promise of Allah comes about; surely Allah will not fail in (His) promise

[WALAW ANNA QUR-ANAN SUYYIRAT BIHI ALJIBALU AW QUTTIAAAT BIHI AL-ARDU AW KULLIMA BIHI ALMAWTA BAL LILLAHI AL-AMRU JAMEEAAANAFALAM YAY-ASI ALLATHEENA AMANOO AN LAW YASHAO ALLAHU LAHADA ALNNASA JAMEEAAAN WALA YAZALU ALLATHEENA KAFAROO TUSEEBUHUM BIMA SANAAAOO QARIAAATUN AW TAHULLU QAREEBAN MIN DARIHIM HATTA YA/TIYA WAAADU ALLAHI INNA ALLAHA LA YUKHLIFU ALMEEAAADA]

We are quoting from the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah.

Al Itqan fi Uloom al Quran, Volume 1 page 238
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 4 page 63, Surah R’ad verse 31
Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page 373 by Ibn Hajar Asaqlani

We read in Tafseer Al Itqan:

“Ibn Abbas recited this verse as ‘AFALAM YATBAIN ALLATHEENA’. He was told that it is ‘AFALAM YAY-ASI ALLATHEENA’ to which Ibn Abbas replied: “The writer has written YAY-ASI but I think that he may not have been wakeful at that time of writing this word.”

Imam of Ahle Sunnah Ibn Hajar Asqalani writes in his commentary of Sahih Bukhari [Fatah al-Bari, 8:373]:

“And Tabari and Abd bin Hamid narrated with a Sahih chain containing all the narrators from the rijal of Bukhari, from Ibn Abbas that he recited “AFALAM YATBAIN” and said that the writer had written it [YAY-ASI] when he was drowsy.”


According to the belief of the pious Tabayeen and Sahaba, there is a ‘mistake’ in Surah Aal e-Imran

We read in the Quran[Shakir 3:81]:

And when Allah made a covenant through the prophets: Certainly what I have given you of Book and wisdom-- then an messenger comes to you verifying that which is with you, you must believe in him, and you must aid him. He said: Do you affirm and accept My compact in this (matter)? They said: We do affirm. He said: Then bear witness, and I (too) am of the bearers of witness with you.

Now we are quoting from the following books of Ahle Sunnah

Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, Volume 3 page 205, Surah Aal e Imran, verse 81
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 3 page 124
Tafseer Tabari, Vol 6 page 554 Surah Aal e Imran, verse 81
Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 3 page 47
Tafseer Fatah al Qadeer, Volume 1 page 225, Surah Aal e Imran, verse 81

We read in Tafseer Tabari:

Al-Rabee used to read: 'and Allah made a covenant with the people who were given the book'. He said: ‘And that is how Ubai bin Kaab used to read it.’

Muhammad bin Amro narrated from Abu Asim from Isa from Ibn Abi Nujaih from Mujahid who said about the verse: “And when Allah made a covenant through the prophets: Certainly what I have given you of Book and wisdom”. He said: ‘It is a mistake of the scribes. In the recitation of Ibn Masud it was in this manner: “And Allah made a covenant with the people who were given the book”’.

According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s Taqrib al-Tahdib, Muhammad bin Amro bin Abaad is ‘Seduq’. Abu Asim al-Dhahak bin Mukhalad is ‘Thiqa Thabt’ while Isa bin Maymoon, Abdullah ibn Abi Nujaih and Mujahid bin Jabr are ‘Thiqah’.


Sunni belief that a word in Surah Bani Israil got changed due to rough use of ink by the scribe

Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti records in Al-Itqan 1:542:

Al-Dahak was asked: 'How do you recite the verse 'Wa Qaza Rabuka'?'. He replied: 'Neither we nor Ibn Abbas used to recite this verse in this manner, actually its "Wa wasa Rabuka". This verse used to be read and written like this but your writer diped his pen into ink pot, he got more ink than required and hence 'Waa' (و) got mixed up with 'Saad' (ص)'.

Thus we learned from this narration that in Surah Bani Israil verse 23, the word 'Qaza' is incorrect while the 'actual' word before the 'mistake' of the scribe was 'Wasa'!


Umar and other Sahaba did not believe in present Quran as there is an abrogated word in Surah Juma, while they knew the ‘correct’ word

We read in Surah Jum’a [Shakir 62:9]:

O you who believe! when the call is made for prayer on Friday, then hasten to the remembrance of Allah and leave off trading; that is better for you, if you know.

YA AYYUHA ALLATHEENA AMANOO ITHA NOODIYA LILSSALATI MIN YAWMI ALJUMUAAATI FAISAAAW ILA THIKRI ALLAHI WATHAROO ALBAYAAA THALIKUM KHAYRUN LAKUM IN KUNTUM TAAALAMOONA

For the proof of Tahreef offered by Umar, we will rely on the following Sunni texts:

Fatah al Bari, Volume 8 page 496
Tafseer Kabeer, Volume 7 page 206
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 6 page 219
al-Musanaf by Abdulrazaq, Volume 3 page 207

We read in Tafseer Dur e-Manthur, Surah Juma:

Abu Ubaid narrated in his (book) al-Fadhael and Saeed bin Mansur, Ibn Abi Shayba, Ibn al-Munder and Ibn al-Anbari in the Masahif (book) from Kharsha bin al-Hur that he said: ‘Umar bin al-Khatab saw me carrying a tablet written in it ‘{when the call is made for prayer on Friday, then hasten to the remembrance of Allah}(FAISAAAW ILA THIKRI ALLAH)’. He (Umar) asked: ‘Who dictated this to you?’ I replied: ‘Ubai bin Kaab’. He said: ‘Ubai recited the abrogated (part), he (Umar) recited it ‘FAMZO ILA THIKRI ALLAH’

Regarding its chain of narration, Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani records [Fatah al-Bari, Book of Commentry of Quran, Surah Juma]:

“Narrated by Saad bin Mansur and he clarified the medium [narrator] between the [narrator] Ibrahim and Umar who is Kharsha ibn al Hurr therefore the chain is Sahih.”

Imam AbdulRazaq Sanani records in his Musnaf:

Abdulrazaq narrated from Mu'amar and others from al-Zuhari from Salem from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Umar used to recite the verse of Juma chapter in this manner: ‘FAMZO ILA THIKRI ALLAH’ until he passed away.’

According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s Taqrib al-Tahdib, Abdulrazaq al-San'ani is ‘Thiqah’ (v1 p599), M'amar bin Rashid is ‘Thiqah Thabt’ (v2 p202) and Salem bin Abdullah is ‘Thabt’ (v1 p335) and about Al-Zuhari he said: ‘There is a consensus on his magnificence’ (v2 p132).


According to Sahabi Ibn Masud clear Tahreef has been committed in Surah Zukhraf

The 45th verse of Surah Zukhraf is in the following manner [Shakir 43:45]:

And ask those of Our messengers whom We sent before you: Did We ever appoint gods to be worshipped besides the Beneficent Allah?

In order to show the different wordings of this verse recited by the famed companion Abdullah Ibn Masud, we shall rely on the following Sunni books.

Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 16 page 95
Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume page 382, Surah Zukhruf verse 45
Tafseer Ibn Kathir (Urdu), Vol 5 page 35 Surah Zukhruf verse 45

We read in Tafseer Ibn Kathir [Tafseer Ibn Kathir [Arabic]; Tafseer Ibn Kathir (Urdu), Vol 5 Parah 25 Page 35 (Farid Book Depot Dehli)]:

Abdullah bin Masud recited it as:
“And ask those whom We sent before you of Our Messengers”

Now apart from this version of the verse recited by Ibn Masud, Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti has recorded yet another version, recited by Ibn Masud, which again is not the one we read today [Tafseer Dur al-Manthur 7:382]:

In Ibn Masud's recitation: ‘And ask those who read the book before you’

Notice the big difference between the two versions of this verse recited by Ibn Masud and the one in our Quran. Both the versions of Ibn Masud are demanding the Prophet to ask the people to whom Allah [swt] had sent prophets before, whilst the verse we recite today is demanding the Muhammad to ask those prophets. Moreover, the second version of Ibn Masud is considerably different than the others as it contains the words ‘who read the book’.

Interestingly, after recording the tradition, Ibn Kathir then says:

“Yet this appears to be an explanation rather than an alternate version of recitation. And Allah knows best.”

There are numerous traditions, according to which, Ibn Masud and his companions had the Quranic verses in their Mushafs with words that differ from the manner in which Muslims recite verses today. Are all of those traditions going to be explained away as explanations rather than alternate verses?


Ibn Abbas and Saeed bin Jubayr marked a ‘mistake’ in Surah Nur verse 27 of Uthman’s Mushaf

We read in Quran [Shakir 24:27]:

O you who believe! Do not enter houses other than your own houses until you have asked permission and saluted their inmates; this is better for you, that you may be mindful.

[YA AYYUHA ALLATHEENA AMANOO LA TADKHULOO BUYOOTAN GHAYRA BUYOOTIKUM HATTA TASTA/NISOO/ WATUSALLIMOO AAALA AHLIHA THALIKUM KHAYRUN LAKUM LAAAALLAKUM TATHAKKAROONA]

We read in the following reliable books of Ahle Sunnah.

Tafseer Itqan, Volume 1 page 228
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 5 page 38, Surah Nur verse 27
Mustadrak al Hakim, Volume 2, kitab al tafseer
Tafseer Tabari, Volume 18 page 146

We read the testimony of Sahabi Ibn Abbas in Tafseer Tabari:

Ibn Bashar narrated from Muhammad bin Jaffar from Shu'aba from Abi Bashir from Saeed bin Jubair from Ibn Abbas about this verse ‘{O you who believe! Do not enter houses other than your own houses until you have asked permission (TASTA/NISOO) and saluted their inmates}’. He said: ‘It is a mistake by the scribe. ‘{until you have asked permission (TASTAZINO) and saluted their inmates}’.

According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s Taqrib al-Tahdib, Muhammad bin Bashar, Muhammad bin Jaffar al-Hadali and Shu'aba are ‘Thiqah’ while Abu Bashr Bayan bin Bashr and Saeed bin Jubair are ‘Thiqah Thabt’.

Moreover we read a similar testimony by one of the revered Tabayeen namely Saeed bin Jubair:

Ibn al-Muthana narrated from Wahab bin Jarir from Shu'aba from Abi Beshr from Saeed bin Jubair the same but he added: ‘It is supposed to be '{until you have asked permission (TASTAZINO)}', but it was a mistake of the scribe'

According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s Taqrib al-Tahdib, Wahab bin Jarir and Shu'aba are ‘Thiqah’ while Muhammad bin al-Muthana, Abu Bashr Bayan bin Bashr and Saeed bin Jubair are ‘Thiqah Thabt’.


Ibn Abbas marked another ‘mistake’ in Surah Nur, verse 35 of Uthman’s Mushaf

We read in Tafseer Ibn Abi Hatim 8:2595:

Ali bin al-Hussain narrated from Nasr bin Ali from his father from Shebl bin Abaad from Qays bin Saad from Atta from Ibn Abbas‘{Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth; a likeness of His light is as a niche}’. He said: ‘This is a mistake by the scribe, He (Allah) is greater than to be his light as a niche, He said (that its):‘{a likeness of the believer's light is as a niche}’’.

According to Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani’s Taqrib al-Tahdib Ali bin al-Hussain bin Ibrahim al-Ameri is ‘Seduq’ and Nasr bin Ali al-Jahdhami is ‘Thiqah Thabt’ where as Ali bin Nasr, Shebl bin Abbad, Qays bin Saad al-Makki and Atta bin Rabah are ‘Thiqah’.

See the big difference between the two versions of this verse. According to Mushaf of Uthman, we believe the the verse is talking about Allah [swt]while Ibn Abbas [ra] not only unequivocally rejected this but advanced the ‘correct’ version of this words according to which this verse is talking about‘believers’.


Shocking Sunni belief: There are four mistakes in Quran

Imam Abu Daud’s son Allamah Abi Bakar Sajistani records this daring tradition in his esteemed book Al Musahif [page 42]:

“Abdullah narrated from Al-Fadhal bin Hamad al-Khayri narrated from Khlad (he meant Ibn Khalid) from Zaid Ibn Hubab narrated from Ash'ath from Saeed bin Jubayr: "There are four mistakes in Quran:
"ALSSABI-OON" [5:69], "WAALMUQEEMEEN" [4:162], "FAASSADDAQA WAAKUN MINA ALSSALIHEEN" [63:10], "IN HATHANI LASAHIRANI" [20:63]”.


Aisha rejected the authenticity of the Quran and marked ‘mistakes’ in the Quran compiled by Uthman

We read in the following texts of Ahle Sunnah:

Al Musahif, page 43
Tafseer Tabari, Volume 2 page 18 , Surah Nisa verse 162
Tafseer Gharaib al Quran, Volume 2 page 17, Surah Nisa
Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 2 page 246, Surah Nisa
Tafseer Thalabi, Volume 6 page 250
Tafseer Itqan, Volume 1 page 210
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 2 page 246 , Surah Al Maidah
Tafseer Mazhari, Volume 6 page 149
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 11 page 216
Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, Volume 1 page 31
Tafseer Ma’alim al Tanzeel, Volume 4 page 221
Al Muhazraat, Volume 3 page 435, Al Had

We read the following bold testimony of Aisha in Tafseer Thalabi:

Abu Bakr bin Abdoos and Abu Abdullah bin Hamid narrated from Abu al-Abbas al-Asim from Muhammad bin al-Jahm al-Samri from al-Fara from Abu Mu'awiyah from Hisham bin Arwa from his father that Aisha was asked about Allah’s statements in Surah Nisa (verse 162) ‘LAKINI ALRRASIKHOONA’ and ‘WAALMUQEEMEENA’ and the Almighty’s statement in Sura Maidah (verse 69) ‘INNA ALLATHEENA AMANOO WAALLATHEENA HADOO WAALSSABI-OON’ and His statement (Taha, 63) ‘IN HATHANI LASAHIRANI’. Aisha replied: ‘O my nephew, this is due to mistakes committed by the scribe’.

Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Ahmad bin Abdoos: Dahabi said: ‘Imam’ (Siar alam alnubala, v17 p58). Abu Abdullah bin Hamed al-Waraq: Dahabi said:‘Sheikh and Mufti of Hanbalis’ (Siar alam alnubala, v17 p203). Abu al-Abbas al-Asim: Dahabi said: ‘Thiqah’ (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v3 p860).Muhammad bin Jahm al-Samri: Dahabi said: ‘Darqutni said that he was Thiqah’ (Siar alam alnubala, v13 p164). Al-Fara bin Yahya: Dahabi said:‘Thiqah’ (Siar alam alnubala, v10, p119). Abu Mu'wiyah Muhammad bin Khazem: Dahabi said: ‘Thabt’ (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p294). Hisham bin Urwa: Dahabi said: ‘Hujja’ (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 144). Urwa bin al-Zubair:Dahabi said: ‘Thabt’ (Tazkirat al-Hufaz, v1 p62).


Uthman testifyied that some Quranic words were incorrectly transcribed

This atrocious view of Uthman has been recorded in the the following esteemed books of Ahle Sunnah.

Tafseer Itqan (Urdu) Volume 1 page 492
Tafseer Ruh al Ma’ani, Volume 1 page 30
Tafseer al-Kabeer, Volume 6 page 38
Tafseer Qurtubi, Volume 11 page 212, Surah Taha verse 63
Tafseer Fath al Qadeer, Volume 3 page 361
Tafseer Ma'alam al Tanzeel, Volume 3 page 361, Surah Nisa verse 161
Tafseer Dur e Manthur, Volume 2 page 246, Surah Maidah
Al Muhazraat, Volume 2 page 434 by Raghib Isfahani
Tafseer Mazhari (Urdu), Volume 3 page 215 & 216
Al Fauz al Kabir al Usool al Tafseer by Shah Waliullah Dehalvi
al Kashf wal Byan fi Tafseer e Quran by Abu Ishaq Thalabi
Al Musahif by Ibn Ashtah

Allamah Baghwi writes in Tafseer Ma'alam al-Tanzeel:

"There is disagreement over 'ALMUQEEMEENA ALSSALAT'. Aisha [ra] and Aban bin Uthman said that was written in the Quran due to a mistake on the part of the transcriber. Its correction is essential and it should be written as 'ALMUQEEMOONA ALSSALAT'. Similarly in Surah Maidah 'AALSSABI-OONA' and in Surah Taha 'IN HATHANI LASAHIRANI' have also been written due to the mistake of scribes. Uthman stated that he had seen some mistakes in the Quran and Arabs would corret the through their language and they had asked him to change them but he said that these mistakes did not change Haram to Halal and vice versa"

We should also mention that Imam of Nawasib Ibn Taimiyah has written in his Minhaj, under the discussion of Tafseer Thalabi that:

“Baghwi’s Tafseer is the abridged form of Thalabi’s Tafseer and he (Baghwi) didn’t include fabrications in his Tafseer”

We read in Tafseer Kabeer:

“When Uthman saw his [compiled] Quran he stated that he observed some mistakes that would be corrected by the Arabs through their language.”

We read in al-Musahif:

“When the Quran was written it was brought to Uthman who saw mistakes in its scripture. He said that there was no need to correct them, as the Arabs would make the correction themselves”

One of the beloved scholars of Deobandies namely Qazi Thanaullah Uthmani Pani Patti in his commentary of verse 162 of Surah Nisa records in his esteemed work Tafseer Mahzari 3:215,216  (Published by Daarul Isha’t Karachi):

“Baghwi has written the statements of Aisha [ra] and Aban Bin Uthman [ra] that ‘ALMUQEEMOONA ALSSALAT’ should have been written at this place. Similarly ‘WAALSSABI-OON’ in Surah Maidah’s verse ‘INNA ALLATHEENA AMANOO WAALLATHEENA HADOO WAALSSABI-OON’ and ‘HATHANI’ in the verse ‘IN HATHANI LASAHIRANI’ are the mistakes of writer (It should have been SABI-EEN & HATHAIN respectively). Hadrat Uthman [ra] had also stated that there were some mistakes (of writing) in the Mushaf and Arabs whilst reciting them would make the corrections themselves, through their language. When asked why he did not make the amendments, Uthman asked that it remain the same as it does not alter Halal to Haram and Haram to Halal.”

We read in Al-Itqan fi Uloom al-Quran (Urdu) 1:492:

“Akramah states that when Mushafs were written, they were presented before Uthman and he found some incorrect words written in them and then said that they shouldn’t be changed as Arabs would themselves make the corrections. Or he said that they would themselves correct the pronunciations (vowel points, diacritics). Had the narrator been from the tribe of Thaqeef and the writer been from the tribe of Hadheel, these mistakes wouldn’t have been in the Mushaf.”

Uthman’s belief in the incorrectness of Quran has been testified by his own son, Aban. We read in Tafseer Qurtubi Surah Taha, verse 63:

“Aban bin Uthman recited the cited verse [IN HATHANI LASAHIRANI] before his father Uthman. Uthman said: “It is incorrect”. Someone asked him: “Why don’t you correct it?”. Uthman replied: “Leave it there, it doesn’t make any difference in respect of what is Halal and Haram’”.

Qazi Shawkani also records Uthman’s blasphemy against the Quran. We read in Fatah al-Qadeer:

“There are traditions according to which Uthman said that certain Quranic words were wrong due to mistakes committed by writers”


A verse in Surah Dhariyat does not contain the same words taught by Muhammad to his Sahabahs

In Surah Dhariyat, verse 51, we read the following verse:

"Surely Allah is the Bestower of sustenance, the Lord of Power, the Strong"

According to Sunni scholars, this is not the form of verse that was taught by the Holy Prophet to the Sahabi, Abdullah Ibn Masud. We read in Sunan Tirmidi:

The Messenger of Allah taught me to recite: "I am the Bestower of sustenance, the Lord of Power, the Strong".

Abu Isa said that this hadith is Hasan Sahih.

http://www.answering-ansar.org/aDecors/html_ico.gif Online Sunan Tirmidi with Commentary, Hadith 2864 
http://www.answering-ansar.org/aDecors/html_ico.gif Online Sunan Abu Daud with commentary, Hadith 3479 (with different chain) 

What is the view of Ahle Sunnah regarding the words taught by the Muhammad to Ibn Masud? According to Sunni traditions, the Prophet ordered his adherents to learn the Quran from Ibn Masud. The tradition is deemed Hassan Sahih by Imam Abu Isa Ibn Isa Tirmidi.


Belief of the Hinda Haq Chaar Yaari cult: Verse 25 of Surah Noor is different from what the Sahaba and the Prophet recited

We read in Surah Noor, verse 25:

“On that Day Allah will pay them the recompense of their deeds in full, and they will know that Allah, He is the Manifest Trut.”

[YAWMA-ITHIN YUWAFFEEHIMU ALLAHU DEENAHUMU ALHAQQA WAYAAALAMOONA ANNA ALLAHA HUWA ALHAQQU ALMUBEENU]

Now we read in Tafser Tabari 18:141 that the Sahabi Ubai bin Kaab had this verse in his compilation in a shuffled manner:

Jarir said: ‘I read it in Ubai bin Kaab’s Mushaf as ‘Allah the just will pay back to them their reward in full (YUWAFFEEHIMU ALLAHU ALHAQ DEENAHUM)’

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti has recorded that the Prophet recited the same verse in an even more different manner [Tafseer Dur e-Manthur 5:36]:

Tabarani and Ibn Mardweh narrated from Behz bin Hakim from his father from his grand father that the Prophet (pbuh) recited: ‘{Allahthe just will pay back to them in full their reward} (YUWAFFEEHI ALLAHU ALHAQ DEENAHUM)’

Please ponder over the big difference between the verses recited by Muhammad Ubai bin Kaab and the version that is present in the mushaf of Uthman. It has the word “ALHAQ” after “ALLAH” and the word “DEENAHUM” after the “ALHAQ” whereas in the Quran compiled by Uthman the word “DEENAHUM” is present between the words “ALLAH” and “ALHAQ” which results in the emergence of a term ‘Allah the just’ according to the Prophet and Ubai. Moreover, there is another difference in the version of the verse (24:25) the Prophet [s] believed in and what we have today and the difference is in the word “YUWAFFEEHIMU” which is plural whilst the Prophet used to believe in a word “AFFEEHI” that was singular.
 

Sahabi Ibn Masud attested to a different word in Surah 93, verse 8

In the Holy Quran (93:8) we read:

“Did He not find thee destitute and enrich (thee)?”

Imam Suyuti in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur and Ibn Attia al-Andalusi in al-Muharar al-Wajiz, Volume 5 page 495 have recorded that a great Sahabi did not believe in the aforesaid words of the Quran, rather he believed in a different form of this verse [Tafseer Dur al-Manthur, 8:544]:

Narrated Ibn al-Anbari in al-Masahif from al-Amash that he said: ‘Ibn Masud recited it like this: ‘He found you lacking and enriched you’

The Quran has used the word ‘Aael’ which means that he had money but not enough, thus he was in need whereas the Sahabi Ibn Masud believed in the word ‘Adeem’ which means he had nothing at all. Moreover, the grammars of the two forms of verse are entirely different from one another since the form of verse we have today is interrogative whilst Ibn Masud believed in an affirmative form of the verse.
 

Ibn Masud believed in a different word in Surah 4 verse 40

In the Holy Quran (4:40) we read:

“Surely Allah does not do injustice to the weight of an atom.”

Now Imam Suyuti in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur  2:539, Imam Abu Ishaq Thalabi in Tafseer Thalabi, Volume 3 page 308 and Ibn Attia al-Andalusi in al-Muharar al-Wajiz, Volume 2 page 254 have recorded that Abdullah Ibn Masud did not believe in the aforesaid Quranic verse rather he believed in a different version of this verse:

Ibn Abi Dawood recorded in al-Masahif (book) from Atta from Abdullah (Ibn Masud) that he recited: ‘Surely Allah does not do injustice to the weight of an ant’

We can see the difference between the two versions of this verse: the version we have today of this verse assures us that Allah does not do injustice even to the weight of ‘an atom’, whilst Abdullah Ibn Masud believed that Allah does not do injustice even to the weight of ‘an ant’that is, a name that has been given to a particular creature.
 

Word 'grapes' has been replaced with the word 'wine' in Surah Yusuf

In Surah Yusuf verse 36, we read:

"[Shakir 12:36] And two youths entered the prison with him. One of them said: I saw myself pressing wine...."

[WADAKHALA MAAAAHU ALSSIJNA FATAYANI QALA AHADUHUMA INNEE ARANEE AAASIRU KHAMRAN]

We read in Tafseer Dur al-Manthur 4:19:

Ibn Masud read it as "AAASIRU ANBAH" (pressing grapes) and he (Ibn Masud) said: 'By Allah, I heard it from Allah's Messenger likewise.'

So here we learnt that in the Quran compiled by Uthman we read “AAASIRU KHAMRAN” (pressing wine) instead of “ASR ANBAH” (pressing grapes), which, according to great Sahabi Ibn Masud, was not only the word he believed in but that was the (correct) word the Muhammad had taught him.
 

Aisha and Ibn Abbas believed in a different version of Surah Nisa, verse 117

We read in the Quran [Shakir 4:117]:

They do not call besides Him on anything but idols, and they do not call on anything but a rebellious Shaitan.

[IN YADAAOONA MIN DOONIHI ILLA INATHAN WA-IN YADAAOONA ILLA SHAYTANAN MAREEDAN]

Allamah Jalaluddin Suyuti in his commentary of the above cited verse in his esteemed work Tafseer Dur e-Manthur 2:223 records:

“Aisha narrates that the Holy Prophet [s] recited “IN YADAAOONA MIN DOONIHI ILLA AUNTHA”.

We also read:

Ibn Abbas used to recite “IN YADAAOONA MIN DOONIHI ILLA AUNTHA.”


Word 'JAHILEEN' has been replaced with 'DALLEEN' in Quran 26:20

We have relied on the following esteemed Sunni sources:

Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Volume 6 page 291
Tafseer Tabari, Volume 19 p84
Tafseer Ibn Abi Hatim, Volume 8 page 2755
Tafseer al-Thalabi, Volume 7 page 161
al-Muharar al-Wajiz by Ibn Attia al-Andalusi, Volume4 page 228
Tafseer al-Bahr al-Muhit by Ibn Hayan al-Andalusi, Volume7 page 11
al-Burhan by Zarkashi, Volume 4 page 189

We read in Holy Quran 26:20:

He said: I did it then, when I was of those who are astray.

[QALA FAAAALTUHA ITHAN WAANA MINA ALDDALLEENA]

But our opponents believe that one of their beloved Sahaba, namely Abdullah Ibn Masud, did not believe 'DALLEEN' (astray) to be the actual word that was revealed in this verse, but it was 'JAHILEEN' (ignorant) [Tafseer Dur al-Manthur 6:291]:

Ibn Juraij said: 'According to Ibn Masud's recitation its: 'I did it then, when I was of those who are ignorant (JAHILEEN).''


Tahreef in Surah Yusuf

Another example Tahreef of the Quran committed by Uthman bin Abi Sheybah was with regards to the verse 12:70:

 So when he furnished them with their provisions…

Imam Dhahabi has recorded:

Ali ibn Muhammad Ibn Kas said that Ibrahim al-Khisas said: Uthman ibn Abi Sheybah read: 'And when he provided them with their ship', on that they told Uthman that it should be 'And when he provided them with their provisions'. He replied: ‘I and my brother do not recite on the recitation of Asim.''


The famous satanic verses

We are quoting the famous incident of Gharaniq from the following esteemed Sunni sources:

Tafseer Dur al Manthur, Vol 4 page 367 Surah Hajj verse 52
Tafseer Gharaib al Quran, Vol 17 page 109 by Nizamuddin Nishapuri
Tafseer Qurtubi, Vol 12 page 80 by Muhammad Ibn Ahmed Qurtubi
Tafseer Mazhari (Urdu), Vol 8 page 94 By Qadhi Thanaullah Pani Patti
Ghanyatul Talibeen, by Shaykh Abdul Qadir Gilani, Page 172
Tafseer al-Kashaf, Vol. 3, Page 164
Ahkam al Qur'an, Vol. 3, Page 246
Tafseer al-Tabari, Vol. 17, Page 186
Irshad al Sari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari by Qastalani, Vol. 7 page 194
Fatah ul Bari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, Vol. 8 page 349
Tafseer al-Jalalayn, page 338
Minhaj as Sunnah, Volume 2 page 409 by Ibn Tamiyah
Majma al-Zawadi, Volume 7 page 248 Tradition 11376

Al-Bazaar and Al-Tabarani and Ibn Mardaweh and al-Ziya' have narrated through a chain of all trustworthy (Thiqa) narrators by the way of Saeed Ibn Jubayr, from Ibn Abbas that Prophet recited the words of Surah Najm in the following manner:

"Have you then considered the Lat and the Uzza And Manat, the third, the last? These are the lofty (idols), verily their intercession is sought after."

Mushrakeen became delighted on hearing this from Holy Prophet and said that their idols have also been mentioned in Quran. Then Gebrail came and said to Prophet: "Recite same revelation and Quran which I have brought." Prophet again recited the words:

"Have you then considered the Lat and the Uzza And Manat, the third, the last? These are the lofty (idols), verily their intercession is sought after."

Gebrail said: "I had not brought these words, these are from Satan". Then the verse 22:52 was revealed:

"And We did not send before you any messenger or prophet, but when he desired, the Shaitan made a suggestion respecting his desire; but Allah annuls that which the Shaitan casts, then does Allah establish His communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise".

Besdies this, Allamah Jalauddin Suyuti records similar versions of this incident from several other Sahih chains, for example:

“Ibn Jarir and Ibn al-Munder and Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn Mardaweh have narrated through a Sahih chain by the way of Saeed Ibn Jubayr who said...”

"Ibn Jarir, Ibn Al Munzir and Ibn Abi Hatim narrated with a Sahih chain from Abi Al 'Aliyah…"

"Abd bin Hamid and Ibn Jarir by the way of Yunis, from Ibn Shahab narrated:... with Mursal Sahih chain."

Qadhi Thanaullah Pani Patti Uthmani in his commentary of the above mentioned verse adopted the questions based on casting doubts over the authenticity of the episode like his Imams but had no choice than to quote their statements as they deemed the episode to be true:

“...However the tradition we previously mentioned from Saeed bin Jubayr by Bazar, Ibn Mardwaeh and Tabarani is indeed successive [Mutawatur] and strong [Qawi]. Ibn Hajar Asqalani has stated that from the abundance of traditions reported, it is deemed that there is some truth in it…”

The actual statement of Imam Ibn Hajar Asqalani which Qadhi Thanaullah referred to is:

Fatah al-Bari 8:439

Not only these but Imam Ibn Abi Bakar al-Haythami is also among those Sunni scholars, who deemed the incident to be authentic [Sahih] as he stated after recording the tradition [Majma al-Zawadi 7:248 # 11376]:

"Al-Bazar and Tabarani narrated it and they added '{the penalty of a Mighty Day}' in the day of Badr, the narrators are the narrators of Sahih."

Imam Ibn Tamiyah also believed that Holy Prophet recited Satanic verses and in this regard he cites the testimony of his beloved Salaf. He writes [Minhaj Sunnah 2:409]:

“What occurred with suratul Najm and its recitation ‘These are the lofty (idols), verily their intercession is sought after’ is well known amongst the Salaf; that this was recited by Rasulullah and then Allah abrogated it.”

The testimony of Shaykh Sherani that, his fear of investigating individuals prevented him from citing all the verses that were destroyed to enable the usage of the Uthmani manuscript.

We read in 'Kabreyat Ahmer', p. 143 (published in Egypt) the following statement of Allamah Abdul Wahab Sherani:

“Had there been no fear of weak hearts going astray and knowledge reaching those that were ineligible, I would have cited all those verses that were lost from the Mushaf of Uthman, nobody disagrees with the contents of the Uthmani Quran”





6.  Corruption in the Quran according to Ahle Sunnah Ulema


Deobandi Imam Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri has admitted that the Holy Quran contains distortions.

Prominent Deobandi Imam Sheikh Muhammad Anwar Shah Kashmiri (d. 1352 H) in his esteemed book Faiz al Bari the commentary of Sahih Bukhari writes:

“The tahreef of meanings has not taken place in a lesser amount. In my eyes, this is proved by research that the tahreef of words has taken place in this Quran. This tahreef was done either intentionally or by mistake.”

Faiz al-Bari Shrah Sahih Bukhari 3:395, Kitab al Shahadaat (Khizrah Book Depo, Deoband. India)

The book can also be downloaded from the following Salafi online library  (volume 2, MS Word, p. 491).

This person has been given the title of “Imam al-Asr” [Imam of the present time]. We should point out the revereence this scholar enjoys amongst Deobandies. Another grand scholar of Deobandis Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi praised Anwar Shah Kashmiri in the following words:

“Once Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi sat in a lecture of Allama Kashmiri. After hearing this lecture, Hadhrat Thanvi said: “Every sentence of Shah Saheb can be turned in to a book” (Anwarul Bari, v.2, p.235). Hadhrat Thanvi also said: “I have benefited so much from Hadhrat Shah Saheb that his respect that I have in my heart is on par with the respect that my other teachers occupy, even though I was never his student” (Anwarul Bari 2:235).”

Another Deobandi scholar Mawlana Abdul Qadir Raipuri wrote about him (Akabir-e-Ulama-e-Deoband p98):

“Indeed Hadrat Shah Sahib is a sign from the signs of Allah.”


Renowned Sunni scholar Dr. Israr Ahmed’s testimony: The current Quran is not the real one; it has mistakes in it.

There are very few Sunni Muslims, who are unfamiliar with Dr. Israr Ahmed particularly those from the Indian sub continent. Details about him can be ascertained from his website. A few months ago he stated clearly that the present Quran is corrupted and is not the same as the one guaranteed protection by Allah. This statement created outrage amongst the Deobandi mullahs that resulted in Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI), one of the largest Deobandi organizations in Pakistan, attacking him in their monthly magazine through the following interesting comments [Monthly Zarb-e-Haq, May 2005, Madressa Mehmoodia, Karachi]:

THE CURRENT Quran CONTAINS MISTAKES AND IS NOT THE REAL ONE: DR. ISRAR

Like Qadianis those that do not believe in the protection of Quran should likewise be declared infidels under the constitution of Pakistan. No scholar, not even Christians or Jews have never had the gaul to suggest such about the Quran, Commentary by Abdul Quddus Baloch

Karachi (representative of Zarb-e-Haq): Internationally famed, renowned scholar Dr. Israr Ahmed; the founder of organizations like Khudam al Quran, Tanzeem-e-Islami and Tehreek-e-Khilafat has preached to the public in public gatherings, writings and video cassettes that the Quran we have in our possession is not the real one rather it is a copy. The real Quran is written on Loh-e-Mehfooz which is free from all mistakes whilst the Quran possessed by the Ummah has mistakes in it. Whilst providing a commentary of the verses dealing with the protection of the Quran Dr. Israr asserted that the promise is not about the Quran possessed by the Ummah, rather it is about the Quran of Loh-e-Mehfooz. “Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian” do not refer to the copy of Allah’s book that is in our hands rather these verses were revealed for the verses written on Loh-e-Mehfooz. Allah also says "None touches save the purified ones" this verse likewise does not refer to the copy of the Quran we possess, that is the Usmani scripture that is unprotected and can be touched by impure and pure people.

Zarb-e-Haq’s Commentary: …. the intellectual commentaries of the Ulema exist in their academic and non academic books. Whilst one can also deem such commentaries as incorrect, it remains an unequivocal fact that none of these scholars of commentary ever had doubts over the authenticity of the Quran. This Quranic verses are deemed sufficient enough about the protection of the present Quran. Qazi Abdul Kareem Kalachi kept strking his head on account of the statement of Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri about Tahreef of words in the Quran in his ‘Faiz al Baari’. Had Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri like Dr. Israr spoken these words in public gatherings or common gatherings of scholars then he would have been excommunicated from Islam and would have been forced for repent…”


The Scholar Uthman bin Abi Sheybah (d. 287) committed Tahreef to the Quran

Let us first introduce this personality from the pen of Imam Dhahabi, who said: ‘He is an Imam, a major Hafiz and Mufasir’ (Siar Alam Alnubala, 11:151). Imam ibn Haban mentioned him in his book of Thiqah narrators i.e. al-Thuqat, 8:454. Imam al-Ejli declared him ‘Thiqah’ (Marifat al-Thuqat 2:130) as did Imam Ibn Moin (Tazkirat al-Hufaz 2:444), whilst Imam Abu Hatim Al-Razi graded him ‘Seduq’ (Al-Jarh wa al-Tadil 6:167).

Tahreef in Surah Fil

Imam Dahabi in his esteemed book, Siyar Alam al Nubla 11:153 records:

''Darqutni said: Ahmed ibn kamil has narrated that Al Hasan ibn Alhabab said that Uthman ibn Abi Sheybah recited for them in the tafsir 'Have you not considered how your Lord dealt with the possessors of the elephant?’ that he recited it as: ‘Alif-lam-meem’”.

As you know, there are some words/letters in the Quran known as Al-Muqattaat, i.e. the abbreviated letters, that Muslims believe are words whose true meaning is known only to Allah. One of those words/letters is الم, i.e this term is recited making its letters separate in this manner “Alif-lam-meem”. Examples wherein this term exist are in the opening verses of Surah Baqarah and Surah Aal e-Imran:

Baqrah: 1:  Alif-lam-meem

Aal e Imean:1:  Alif-lam-meem

On the other hand we read in the first verse of Surah Fil (which was recited by Uthman bin Abi Sheybah):

Alam tara kayfa faAAala rabbuka bi-as-habi alfeeli

Have you not considered how your Lord dealt with the possessors of the elephant?

This word ألم may sound the same like that special letters of Allah but it differs and is a complete word that is recited as “Alam”, which means ‘Have you not?’.

Now, instead of reciting this actual word in the verse, Uthman bin Abi Sheybah believed that it was the former and kept committing open Tahreef with the Holy Quran.
 

Imam Ibn Hazm’s doubts over the authenticity of the Quran compiled by Uthman

The prestigious pioneer Imam of Ahle Sunnah Abu Muhammad Ali bin Ahmed Ibn Hazm Andalusi (994-1064) records this bold statement in his esteemed book Al-Ahkam fe usul Al-Ahkam [1:528]:

“Abu Muhammad said: This is the description of Uthman's work that (was compiled) in the presence of the companions. Whilst copying the Mushafs he burnt what he burnt from them from what he had changed intentionally or by mistake.”

The book can be downloaded from the following salafi website.

This glorious scholar of Ahle Sunnah needs no introduction but still allow us to cite some scholarly Sunni opinions of Ibn Hazm. Ibn Khalkan records in Wafiat Al-Ay'an 3:13:

“Al-Hamidi said: We never witnessed anyone as smart or quick in memory, generous or religious as him”

Ibn Hajar Asqlani records in Lisan Al-Mizan  4:198:

S'aeed bin Ahmad Al-Rubay said: ‘In Andlus (Spain) Ibn Hazm was the most knowledgeable amongst the people in Islamic knowledge and the most acquired in knowledge, in addition to this, he is expanded in statements, rhetoric, biography and origins/breed.’

While Imam Dhahabi in his authoritative work, Siar Alam Alnubala 18:18, stated about Ibn Hazm:

"He was a unique Imam."

What medication do the Nawasib take that protects their minds from thinking negatively of the great Ulema, who cast doubts over the authenticity of the Quran? If such a protective taken can be applied to curtail having bad thoughts of these grand Ulema, why is it not likewise taken to understand Shia traditions on tahreef?

Ibn Taimiyah testified that the Salaf used to deny & change Quranic verses

The beloved Imam Ibn Taymiyyah after acknowledging that the Sahaba used to curse asserted [Majmua al-Fatawa 12:492]:

“And likewise some of the Salaf denied words form of the Quran such as the denial of some of them of the verse, ‘Have not yet those who believe known’ (13:31) and them saying that its ‘Has it not beenmade clear to those who believe’ and the denial of reading of the verse by others (of the Salaf) ‘And your Lord has ordained (quthiyah) that you worship none but He’ and they said that its ‘And you Lord has advised (wassa)’ and some of them used to delete Al-Mu’waithatayn from their copies of the Quran (mushaf) and others used to write a surah called Suratul Qunut (!) and this is a known mistake that is known by consensus (Ijma), and via multiple successive transmission (matawatur).

And even with this the tawatur had not been established for them and so they are not kuffar. It is only after showing one the mutawatir proof (that if he rejects it) then he is kafir”

Ibn Tamiyah after accepting a fact sought to defend the indefensible. How did he know that the tawatur was not established for Salaf? The Sahaba benefited from the company of the Holy Prophet and yet we see evidences of them not reciting or rejecting parts of Quran we currently have in our possession. Is this not shameful?

According to Ahle Sunnah, there are some mistakes in the Quran, which Muhammad and companions were unaware, but the Sunni Imam Hamzah bin Ziyat saw Allah in his dream, who directed him to make the amendments.

Renowned scholar of Ahle Sunnah, Shiekh Abdul Wahab bin Ahmed bin Ali Sherani, writes in his esteemed book, Al-Yawaqeet wa al-Jawahir:

“Hamzah Bin Ziyat said: ‘When I saw Allah [swt], I recited the words of Surah Yaseen “Tanzeel ul Aziz” and recited the letter “Laam” with “Zahhah” in it. Allah [swt] admonished me and ordered to recite Tanzeel with the “Fakhah” of Laam as He [swt] had revealed it like that. Moreover when I recited the verse “WAANA IKHTARTUKA” of Surah Taha before the Almighty Allah [swt], He [swt] again rebuked me and ordered me to recite it “WAANA IKHTARTAKA”.

The intial words uttered by the Sunni Imam exist in the present Quran, and differ to those that Allah directed him to recite. From this narration, it is evident that Hafiz Hamzah Bin Ziyat was superior to Abu Bakar, Umar and Uthman, since despite their being Caliphs, Allah did not deem them worthy enough to appear in their dreams, and instruct them of the correct recitals.

Moreover we read in the same book [Al-Yawaqeet wa al-Jawahir 1:119]:

“Ulema have narrated that many Salaf had the privilege of viewing Allah [swt] in their dreams and amongst them Imam Ahmed, Hamzah bin Ziyat and Abu Hanifah head the list. Hamzah bin Ziyat says that when he saw Allah [swt] and recited Surah Yaseen before Him, He [swt] rectified him at two points in its recitation.”

It is worth noting that the author of ‘Al-Yawaqiyat’ counted Ibn Hamzah amongst the prestigious Salaf; Ibn Hajar Asqalani in Taqreeb al Tehdeeb p. 83 and in Tahdib al-Tahdib 3:28 graded him as authentic and truthful figures and showered him with such epithets as Rijlan, Salehan and Sidooqan. He was born in 80H and died at the age of 56. Did the process involving abrogation of verses and recitation continue until that period? By that time, the compilers of the Uthmani manuscript were in their graves. Abdul Wahab Sherani has been named as Al-Faqih al-Hadith in a book of Ahle Sunnah, namely Kashf al-Zanoon 5:641.


Amar Khan is a Pakistan-born ex-Muslim.

 
Hit Counter