SHAFAQNA-
Written by Muhammed Baqir Ansari
The victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran appalled global unbelief and arrogance. As this revolution gained more and more momentum each day, the panic and fear of the unbelievers and the arrogance escalated. In the beginning of the glorious Islamic Revolution of Iran, the criminal superpowers, who had divided the interests of the world among themselves, believed that they could subjugate and control this revolution and bring it into their own orbit, so that the Islamic Revolution of Iran would pose no threat to their interests. However, these superpowers came to realize that this revolution is truly Islamic and aims at the revival of Islam not only in Iran but also all over the world, including Islamic and non-Islamic countries. They even realized that the long-term objective of this revolution is the liberation of all the oppressed people of the world from the yoke of the world-devouring colonialists. The interest and eagerness that the Muslim people and the oppressed of all the world displayed toward this liberating revolution served to enhance the consternation of the colonialists and their devoted agents. For this very reason, they sought to confront this revolution. Every day they hatched plots to overwhelm the Islamic Revolution of Iran. Their satanic conspiracies were channelled through the canals of politics and religion, in a manner that new ideas sprang up in their minds daily. By engineering these plots, they poured their poison into the newly-established roots of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Among their most important political plots, one can name their numerous plans for coup d’etat, their fostering and bolstering of political grouplets both in Iran and abroad, their attempts to sow discord among the political and religious leaders, and tens of other intrigues, at the top of which should be considered the Iraqi-imposed war. This destructive war inflicted heavy losses on the lives and properties of the people. The enormous expenses of this war could have been used to improve the conditions of the poor and destitute Muslims of Islamic countries, especially in areas such as Africa and the like. The conspiracies channelled through religion have not been less important and weaker than their political schemes. In this regard, one of the most important and tried ploy of theirs was to revive the differences between the Sunnis and the Shi’ah. As the overwhelming majority of the Muslim people of Iran unanimously follow the school of thought of the Ahl al-Bayt (A) (the members of the Household of the Holy Prophet-peace be upon them all), the superpowers tried to isolate this vast majority of Muslims from the Islamic Ummah in order to brand this Islamic Revolution as a sectarian revolution. The mercenary mullas, the hirelings who laud the reactionary regimes ruling over Islamic countries, played the most crucial role in this regard. These mercenaries rendered the best services to international kufr (infidelity) and arrogance by means of instigating Islamic sects against Shi’ism and by reviving age-old differences which have always served the tactics of the colonialists. They have done so under the name of Islam and sympathizing with Islam. In the meantime, the Wahhabis, who are, at present, ruling over the holy land of Hijaz and the principal base of Islam and al-Haramayn al-Sharifayn (the holy shrines at Mecca and Medina), have created more trouble than all others. Every day, they publish books and leaflets all over the world and in different languages which are full of falsehood, fabrications, and accusations against the teachings of the members of the Household of the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon them all). Of course, it is not surprising that the Saudi Wahhabism, which has been sponsored by colonialism and is hated by all Islamic sects, and in whose condemnation Sunni `ulama’ have written a large number of books, should embark on sowing discord and exciting sedition. This is because the Wahhabis safeguard the interests of the criminal United States in the region and have bartered Islam for kufr. After the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran which resulted in cutting off the hands of foreigners and unbelievers, especially the U.S. imperialism, from this country and which led to the awakening and awareness of the Muslims all over the world, pitifully, these so called Islamic elements and rulers of Islamic countries, instead of cooperating with this revolution and turning to Islam and their nations, turned their backs on both and looked toward the global arrogance, thus initiating their stratagems against the Islamic Ummah by reliance on kufr. This point has been stressed by the Holy Qur’an where it says: 
… and Allah will by no means glue the unbelievers a way against the believers. (4:141) and the Qur’an also says:
They make their oaths a shelter, and thus turn away from Allah’s way; surely evil is that which they do. (63:2)
Â
In any case, the issue of tahrif of the Holy Qur’an was one of the issues on which they manoeuvred very much and spared no efforts in propagating all kinds of falsehood and fabrication in this connection. Without offering any rational proof, they attributed belief in tahrif of the Holy Qur’an to the Shi’ah. They believed that by doing so they could make the Muslims pessimistic toward the teachings of the school of thought of the Ahl al-Bayt (A). These conspiracies prompted for the preparation of this article. Although the colonialists have always contrived to engage the Muslims in conflicts and to keep them busy with mutual polemics and debates with a view to rule over them. Since this matter has not been sufficiently dealt with in the form of short articles for public benefit, this article has been designed to enter into this discussion very briefly, so as to enlighten the minds of all Muslims. Of course, in this respect, detailed books have been written and comprehensive research has been conducted, to which those interested in investigations into this subject can refer for further information. Among the best books on this subject is “al-Bayan”, written by Ayatullah al-`Uzma al-Sayyid Abu al-Qasim al-Khu’i. This book’s discussion pertaining to absence of tahrif in the Holy Qur’an has been separately published in English. Tahrif of the Qur’an as Viewed by Traditions:
Â
For those who have a slight familiarity with the books of both sects concerning ahadith (traditions), that is, the Sihah of the Sunnis and the various compilations of the traditions of the Shi’ah, it is manifestly clear that there are numerous traditions on the changes in the Holy Qur’an. Perhaps the traditions on this issue included within the books of the Sunnis are more in number than those of the Shi’ah. Nevertheless, those who have bandied about this issue out of spite and not as an objective and unbiased scientific and scholarly discussion, have always avoided the slightest reference to the traditions included in the books belonging to the Sunnis. They have only zoomed their cameras upon few weak narrations given in the books by Shi’ah. These are the narrations that are not acceptable to the Shi’ah `Ulama’ and based on these traditions, they have not issued their views and verdicts. At this stage, before continuing the discussion, it is necessary to draw the attention of the readers to the fact that, from the viewpoint of Shi’ism, traditions related to the Holy Prophet (S) and Ahl al-Bayt (A) generally fall within one of the following four categories based on their degree of reliability: 1. Veracious (sahih) 2. Good (hasan ) 3. Authentic (muwaththaq) 4. Weak [1] (da’if) This classification has been based on the types of narrators and transmitters of the traditions. This means that if a tradition possesses a veracious isnad and if it is narrated by truthful and trustworthy narrators possessing all other necessary conditions, it is correct and reliable and can be used by the `ulama’ and the jurisprudents. Otherwise, in the absence of any one of the necessary requirements, the degree of the validity of the narration comes down until it becomes a “da’if” narration that cannot be considered and put to effect and that cannot serve as a document or proof for a view or verdict. As the books on ahadith comprise all kinds of traditions, one of the prerequisites for every `alim (theologian) and faqih (jurisprudent) in making judgements and issuing verdicts is to identify and distinguish the traditions in terms of their verity and untruth. Therefore, upon seeing a tradition, even in a worthy Shiite book, one cannot judge what the view of the Shi’ah on such and such a subject is. Keeping this in view, it becomes evident that by seeing traditions in Shiite books, whether in the four principal books such as al-Kafi [2], al Tahdhib [3], al-‘Istibsar [4], and Man la yahduruhu al-faqih [5] or in other books such as Wasa’il al-Shi`ah [6], Bihar al-‘anwar [7], and others, one cannot ascribe to the Shiites a view and judgement based on their contents. None of the few traditions concerning alterations in the Holy Qur’an included within the aforesaid books possesses a veracious isnad; therefore, the Shiite `ulama’ have not given attention to them. Similar traditions existing in authentic Sunni books have also been disregarded by the Sunni `ulama’. Some of these traditions have been included in the following sources: Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. V, p. 35; vol. VI, pp. 211, 221. Sahih Muslim, vol. II, p. 736; vol. III, p. 100; vol. IV, pp. 167-168. Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol. V, pp. 131-133; vol. VI, p. 55; vol. VI, pp. 449-451.
Â
For more information in this field, researchers can refer to the books such as al-‘Itqan and al-Durr al-manthur both by al-Suyuti, al Masahif by Abu Dawud, Ruh al-ma`ani by al-‘Alusi, and others. In any case, such traditions in Shi’ah and Sunni books have not been used by the `ulama’ of Islam and no attention has been paid to them. Immunity of the Qur’an from Tahrif:
Â
Now that the traditions on the alteration in the Qur’an included in the Shi’ah and Sunni books are not authentic, reference must be made to the Holy Qur’an itself where it explicitly says: 
Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its preserver. (15:9)
Â
Regarding this holy verse, the Shi’ah and Sunni `ulama’ of Islam have indicated that the word dhikr (Reminder) refers to the Holy Qur’an and the word hifz (preserving) refers to the fact that Allah the Almighty will preserve the Holy Qur’an from any alteration and mutilation. Shaykh Abu ‘Ali al-Tabarsi, a Shi’ah `alim of the olden times, has stated that this holy verse reflects the fact that the Qur’an is immune from any addition, loss, mutilation, and alteration. With respect to this holy verse, `Allamah Tabataba’i has stated: … therefore, the Qur’an is a living and eternal Reminder which will never die and fall into oblivion. It is immune from any addition and loss. It is immune from and secure. against any alterations in form and style which could affect its character and role, that is, as, “the Reminder of Allah which expresses divine truth and knowledge”. For this reason, the aforesaid verse indicates that the Divine Book has always been and will continue to be guarded against any mutilation and alteration.
Â
In the book entitled al-Bayan, Ayatullah al-`Uzma al-Khu i states the following: This verse is indicative of the fact that the Holy Qur’an is guarded against alteration (tahrif) and that the oppressors do not have the power ever to use it as a plaything.
Â
From amongst the Sunni `ulama’, al-Zamakhshari with regard to this verse states: “Allah is the preserver and protector of the Qur’an against all addition, loss, corruption and alteration in all times. In contrast, the other Divine Books have not remained unaltered. The same verse is also a proof that the Holy Qur’an is the Book which has been revealed by Allah and has not been a compilation and production of human beings – because if that had been the case, like all similar books, it would have been certainly subjected to alteration and corruption. Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi also states: In this holy verse, hifz (preserving) means that the Qur’an is immune from and guarded against corruption, addition, and loss.
Â
Here, we do not intend to point out the statements of the `ulama’ of Islam in proof of absence of tahrif in the Holy Qur’an, for this will take much space. We only desire to make mention of the statements of a few great ‘Ulama’ of Islam (as an example) whose opinions are valid and valuable for the Muslims. (3) The Care Exercised in Preserving the Text and Recording of the Holy Qur’an:
Â
Among matters scrupulously observed by the Muslims are the calligraphy, comparison, and memorization of the Holy Qur’an. In addition to taking utmost care in calligraphy, words, letters, and the diacritical marks in the verses of the Holy Qur’an, the Muslims including Shi’ah and Sunnis have also written independent books on these issues, lest the slightest alteration should take place in the Holy Qur’an as a result of the lapse of time. For this very reason, we can see that they have reckoned and recorded the total number of the verses of the Holy Qur’an, the number of words and letters, and even the total number of the dots used in the Holy Qur’an. [8] Some of the `ulama’ of Islam have even counted the total number of the alphabetic letters which are contained in the Holy Qur’an and have said: The letter “Alif” has occurred 48,940 times; the letter “Ba”‘ (the second Arabic alphabetic letter) has occurred 11,420 times; and the letter “Ta “‘ (the third alphabetic letter) has occurred 1,404 times; and so on.
Â
They have reckoned the total number of dots used in the Holy Qur’an and recorded them as 1,520,030 in number. The `ulama’ of Islam have always demonstrated matchless precision in regard to the script of the Holy Qur’an. For example, as for the word ni’mah which can either be written by or of which are correct, the `ulama’ of Islam have stated that the above mentioned word has occurred eleven times with the letter and in the remaining instances with the letter . Refer to the following verses in which this word has been written with the letter (2:231; 3:103; 5:11; 14:28 and 34; 16:72, 83, and 114; 31:31; 35:3; 52:29). The same word has been written with the letter in the remaining verses such as in (2:211: 3:171 and 174; 5:7) and so on. Also the word “likayla” connected which can be written either in connected or disconnected form has occurred four times in connected form and, in other cases, in disconnected form. Refer to the following verses in which the word has occurred in connected form: (3:153; 22:5; 33:50; 57:23). However, the same word has been written in disconnected form in the following verses: (16:70; 33:37). Similar precise calculations have been made by the `ulama’ of Islam in the connected and disconnected forms of other words in the Holy Qur’an such as f’ima min ma , bi’sa ma in lam , an la and so on. Now it is to be seen whether with all this exactitude employed by the `ulama’ of Islam in recording the Holy Qur’an from time immemorial till now, can one accuse a group of Muslims of the charge of making alterations in the Holy Qur’an and mutilating it or believing in its corruption? (4) The Extant Holy Qur’an Available to the Shi’ah and the Sunnis:
Â
Another interesting point is, have those who accuse the Shi’ah of believing in the tahrif of the Holy Qur’an ever tried to investigate the copies of Holy Qur’an printed by the Shi’ah in various countries of the world to find out whether they contain the slightest discrepancy with other editions of the Holy Qur’an or not? Which Qur’an contains these forged chapters and verses that are ascribed to the Shi`ah Qur’an? Which Qur’an contained these that not a single person has ever seen them? Instead of spending so much time in finding a weak tradition or quotation in unauthentic books in a bid to accuse the Shi’ah of believing in the tahrif of the Holy Qur’an, wouldn’t it have been better for the mercenary `ulama’, who embark on sowing the seeds of discord among the Islamic Ummah, to obtain and see numerous copies of the Holy Qur’an of different editions printed by the Shi’ah to discover whether such an accusation is fair or not? At present, the antiquated hand-written manuscripts of the Holy Qur’an by the Shi’ah from the early days of Islam until now are kept in museums of Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, etc. Some of these manuscripts are, once in a while, precisely reprinted in the same form and exposed to public view. Those who entertain the slightest doubt concerning this matter can personally refer to these manuscripts. In the museum of the Qur’an in the holy city of Mashhad, I have personally seen some copies of the Holy Qur’an written on parchment made of deer skin. The period of writing of these copies of Qur’an dates back to more than one thousand years. Some of them are attributed to Imam `Ali (A), al-‘Imam al-Sajjad (the fourth Imam), and some others are attributed to other Imams, Shi’ah ‘Ulama’ and pious men. Similarly, in other museums and libraries, there are also some copies of the Qur’an which are very ancient, but so far no one has been able to claim that even a single word of these manuscripts of the Qur’an differs from what is now available to the Shi’ah and to the Muslims of the world. Thus it is advisable for one to think realistically and not be influenced by these kind of propagandistic hue and cry and not to pay attention to the mental fabrications of malicious individuals and of those who attempt to disunite the people. We, certainly, do not believe that such propaganda will ever have any influence on the minds of the Muslims; however, this subject was worth mentioning lest some simple-minded people might be deceived by these futile statements. (5) At this stage, it is necessary to review the words and statements of the Shi’ah `ulama’ from the beginning until now to unveil the ignorance and malice of some of the so-called ‘ulama’ of Islam who are nowadays sowing the seeds of discord among the Islamic Ummah through their poisonous writings. Unfortunately, the celebrated personality of the Sunnis, Abu al Hasan ‘Ali Nadwi, who claims to be the leader of the Muslims of India and who is one of the renowned Islamic writers, has explicitly claimed in his recent book called Islam and the Earliest Muslims: Two Conflicting Portraits, published in English, Arabic, Urdu, and Persian with wide circulation all over the world, that with the exception of four Shi’ah `ulama’, all others maintain that the Qur’anic text has been mutilated. His exact statement in this regard on page 45 of the book is as follows: They hold that the Qur’anic text was mutilated; there is almost a consensus among their scholars on this point.’
Â
Then he says in footnote of the same page: 1. Only four Shiite doctors, Saduq, Sharif Murtaza, Abu J’afar Tusi and Abu ‘Ali Tabrasi are exceptions to this agreed view of Shiite theologians. But some of them are reported to have recanted their views. Anyway, them is always a doubt that they might have expressed their opinion in favour of purity of the Qu’ran because of their accepted principle of taqaiyya or dissimulation of one’s faith.
Â
We see that following his claim, propagandistic publications run by consuming the funds of the treasury of the Muslims-which is nowadays controlled by the Wahhabis and others in the form of petro-dollars also publicize the same allegation in the farthest reaches of the world without conducting any research to confirm its veracity. As an example, a propagandistic publication issued in South Africa under the title of The Truth about Shi’ism, Part 2, states the following on page 20: The truth about Shi’ism in relation to the Qur’an is summarized in the undermentioned facts.
Â
1. Besides the difference of opinion of only four Shiah theologians in all the centuries of Shi’ism’s history, all Shiah authorities unanimously proclaim that the Qur’an which we have in our possession is a fabricated Qur’an.
Â
2. Even the four Shi’i theologians – i.e. four in the entire history of Shi’ism – who dissented with the teaching of Shi’ism in this regard, do not believe that those who reject the Qur’an are kafir. Thus, although all Shi’i authorities unanimously proclaim the belief of the fabrication of the Qur’an, these four dissenters accept all such deniers of the Qur’an to be Muslims. Thus, their dissent and difference are of no real significance. They remain Shiahs who treat lightly the Shi’i teaching of a fabricated Qur’an.
Â
Now the following statements made by great Shi’ah `ulama’ are quoted, in chronological order: (1) Al-Fadl ibn Shadhan, one of the great Shi’ah ‘ulama’ of the third century of Hijrah, states the following in his book al-‘Idah in rejecting some of his contemporary Sunni ‘ulama’s statements who, by relying on some traditions, believed in the corruption of the Holy Qur’an: But those who, by quoting such traditions, hold that the Qur’anic text has been corrupted, are definitely making a mistake.
Â
(2) Abu Ja’far Mubammad ibn `All ibn Babawayh al-Qummi, known as al-Shaykh al-Saduq, (died 381/991), states the following in his book entitled al- ‘I’tiqadat (Beliefs): With respect to the Holy Qur’an which Allah Almighty has revealed to His Prophet Muhammad (S), we believe that this is that very Qur’an which is between the two covers and is in the possession of the people, and that there is not anything more than this. Whoever charges us with believing in excess, has lied.
Â
(3) In reply to the questions of `Tarabulusiyyat’, al-Sayyid al Murtada `All ibn al-Husayn al-Musawi al-`Alawi, (died 436/1044), states: Knowledge and certainty on the validity of the narration of the Holy Qur’an are like the knowledge and certainty on the existence of countries, cities, famous historical events, popular books, and the poems compiled by the Arabs. This is because the specific regard and attention and the strong motive for the narration of the text of the Holy Qur’an and its upkeeping had been much stronger than the precision and attention given to the above-cited items …. During the time of the Messenger of Allah (S), the Holy Qur’an had been a compiled collection exactly as it is now. The Holy Prophet (S) had even charged a group of his Companions with the responsibility of memorizing and safeguarding the Holy Qur’an. At that time, it was customary for the people to recite the Holy Qur’an before the Holy Prophet (S) to ensure the accuracy of the text. The Holy Prophet (S), too, listened to their recitation. A group of the Companions, such as `Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud, Ubayy ibn Ka’b, and others read the whole text of the Holy Qur’an several times in the presence of the Holy Prophet (S).
Â
With a little attention, one comes to realize that all these matters indicate that the Holy Qur’an has been a compiled collection. No one takes into account the opponents of this belief, be they from Imamiyyah (Twelver Shi’ah or Hashwiyyah, for their view is derived from a group of akhbariyyun (or ashab al-hadith, i.e., followers of the traditions) who had narrated weak ahadith on the subject, thinking that they had related reliable and valid ahadith. Whereas such weak ahadith have no power to challenge something based on definitive knowledge and certainty.
Â
(4) Shaykh al-Ta’ifah Abu Ja’far Mubammad ibn al-Hasan al-Tusi d. 460/1067), states: The remarks about addition and loss in the Qur’anic text are not worthy of respect the Holy Qur’an possesses; as (meaning that the text of the Holy Qur’an is today more than what it was before), there is a consensus among the `ulama’ regarding the invalidity of this matter.
Â
Regarding the deficiency of the Holy Qur’an (meaning that some parts of the Qur’anic text have been deleted), apparently the consensus of the Muslim sects also proves the contrary. The same holds true in our school of faith. This is exactly the belief that has been confirmed and proven by al-Sayyid al Murtada (may Allah be pleased with him). This belief has been clearly expressed in the narrations and traditions.
Â
However, there are a number of traditions from the Shi’ah and Sunnis concerning the deficiency of many verses of the Holy Qur’an and regarding the interchange of some of the verses. All these traditions are “akhbar al-‘ahad”, i.e. traditions which are not mutawatir and cannot cause certainty. Thus, one should turn away and keep away from these sorts of ahadith and should not engage oneself in them. Moreover, these traditions are paraphrasable; had these traditions been correct, they would not have marred the Holy Qur’an which is presently available between the two covers, because knowledge and certainty prove the validity of this Qur’an and no one from among the Islamic Ummah has any objection to or complaint against it, nor does anyone reject it.
Â
(5) Al-Shaykh Abu `Ali al-Tabarsi, who passed away in 548/1153, states the following in the tafsir entitled Majma` al-bayan: There is a consensus and unanimity among the Muslims that there is not any `excess’ in the Holy Qur’an. But with regard to the deficiency of the text of the Holy Qur’an, a group of Imamiyyah and a group of Hashwiyyah who are Sunnis have said that there are alterations and deficiencies in the Holy Qur’an, but the true belief accepted by the Imamiyyah holds otherwise.
Â
(6) Al-Sayyid Ibn Tawus, (died 664/1265), states the following in the book called Sa`d al-su `ud In truth, the Imamiyyah believe in the absence of tahrif in the Holy Qur’an.
Â
Then, in the refutation of some Sunnis who maintain that the Qur’anic text has been corrupted, he states: I am surprised at those who, while believing that the Holy Qur’an has been preserved by the Messenger of Allah (S) and has been compiled by the Prophet (S) himself, have narrated the differences of the people of Makkah and at-Madinah and of the people of Kufah and Basrah. They have also believed that (“In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) is not an integral part of the surahs (chapters) of the Holy Qur’an. It is more surprising that they have reasoned that if (“In the Name of Allah…”) had been an integral part of the surah, then it could have been preceded by something else also. Surprisingly enough! When it is believed that the Holy Qur’an is immune from and guarded against any excess and deficiency, and when such a belief is supported by man’s wisdom and by religion, how could it be said that what had been revealed before the surahs has not been included as a part of the Holy Qur’an? Is such a thing possible?”
Â
These were opinions of the great Shi’ah `ulama’ of the past whose statements are authentic and valid for all other `ulama’ of the subsequent centuries. Thus, there is no necessity to lengthen the discussion and to quote the statements made by the `ulama’ of the subsequent centuries. Hereunder, it will only suffice to mention their names along with the titles of their books in which this discussion has been incorporated. (7) Al-Muhaqqiq Zayn al-Din al-Bayadi (died in 877/1472), in al Sirat al-mustaqim. (8) Muhammad Baha’ al-Din al-`Amili, known as al-Shaykh al-Baha’i (died in 1031/1622), quoted in tafsir Ala’ al-Rahman. (9) Mulla Muhsin, known as Fayd al-Kashani (died in 1091/1680), in tafsir al-Safi (10) Al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Hurr al-`Amili (died in 1104/1692), in his treatise entitled Risalah fi ithbat `adam al-tahrif (a treatise on absence of corruption in the Qur’an). (9) Al-Qadi al-Sayyid Nur Allah al-Shushtari (d. 1019/1610), the contemporary of al-Shaykh al-Baha’i, quoted in Ala’ al-Rahman. (12) Al-Sayyid Muhammad Mahdi ibn al-Sayyid Murtada al Tabataba’i, known as Bahr al-`Ulum (died in 1212/1797), in Fawa’id al-‘usul. (13) Al-Shaykh Ja’far ibn al-Shaykh Khidr al-Janahi al-Najafi, known as Kashif al-Ghita’ (died in 1228/1813), in Kashf al-ghita’ `an mubhamat al-Shari`at al-gharra’. (14) Al-Shaykh Muhammad Hasan ibn al-Mawla `Abd Allah al Mamaqani (died in 1323/1905), in Tanqih al-maqal. (15) Al-Shaykh Muhammad Jawad al-Balaghi (died in 1352/1933), in Ala’ al-Rahman. (16) Mulla Fath Allah al-Kashini (died in 988/1588), in the commentary of Manhaj al-sadiqin. (17) Mirza Hasan al-‘Ashtiyani (died in 1319/1901), in Bahr al fawa’id. (18) Ayatullah Sayyid Husayn Kuhkamari (died in 1299/1882), in Bushra al-wusul ila `ilm al-‘usul. (19) Al-Sayyid `Abd al-Husayn Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi al-`Amili (died in 1377/1957), in Ajwibat masa’il Musa Jar Allah. (20) Ayatullah al-`Uzma al-Sayyid Abu al-Qasim al-Khu’i, contemporary, in al-Bayan. These were the names of the great Shi’ah ulama’ who wrote books confirming the absence of any kind of tahrif in the text of the Holy Qur’an. Surely, there may be comments by other `ulama’ whose books are presently not within our reach. It should be also noted that making mention of the names of these `ulama’ does not necessarily mean that the other `ulama’ do not believe in this point. It rather means that since they had not compiled any books in this field, we could not quote their relevant views and opinions. It is hoped that this brief paper would remove all doubts and accusations made on the teachings of the school of thought of the Ahl al-Bayt (A), and would serve as a basis for further investigations by the researchers and investigators. Wa al-Salam `ala man ittaba`a al-Huda (and peace be on him who follows the guidance). NOTES:
Â
[1]For more study in this field see Al-Tawhid journal, vol. 1, Nos. 1 to 3. [2]Al-Kafi, al-Shaykh Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn Ya’qub al-Kulayni al-Razi (died 329/941). [3] Al-Tahdhib, Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Tusi (died 460/1068). [4] Al-‘Istibsar, Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Tusi(died 460/1068). [5] Man la yahduruhu al-faqih, al-Shaykh al-Saduq Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn Babawayh al-Qummi (died 381/991). [6] Wasa’il al-Shi’ah, al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Hurr al-‘Amili (died 1114/1702). [7]. Bihar al- anwar, ‘Allamah Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi (died 1111/1699). [8]. Refer to the book called “Funun al-‘afnan fi ‘ulum al-Qur’an”compiled by Jamal al-Din Abu al-Faraj ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn al-Jawzi. BIBLIOGRAPHY
Â
Arabic
Â
Ayatullah al `Uzma Abu al-Qasim al-Khu’i, al-Bayan fi tafsir al-Qur’an.
Allamah Tabataba’i, al-Mizan fi tafsir al-Qur’an, vol. 12.
Al-Suyuti, al-‘Itqan fi ‘ulum al-Qur’an.
Zarkashi, al-Burhan fi ‘ulum al-Qur’an.
Abu Dawnd al-Sijistani, al-Masahif.
Ibn al-Jawzi, Funun al-‘afnan fi ‘ulum al-Qur’an.
Ibn al-Khatib, al-Furqan.
Ibn al-Jazzi, al-Tashil fi ‘ulum al-tanzil.
Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Zanjani, Tarikh al-Qur’an.
Dr. ‘Abd al-Sabur Shahin, Tarikh al-Qur’an.
Hadi Ma’rifah, al-Tamhid fi ‘ulum al-Qur an.
Rasul Ja’fariyan, Ukdhubat tahrif al-Qur’an.
Allamah Tabataba’i, al-Qur’an fi al-Islam.
Al-Shaykh Aqa Buzurg al-Tehrani, al-Naqd al-latif fi nafy al-tahrif.
Abd al-Husayn al-Rashti al-Ha’iri, Kashf al-‘ishtibah.
Al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahim al-Tabrizi, Ala’ al-Rahim.
English
Â
Allamah Tabataba’i, The Qur’an in Islam (1985).
Ayatullah Dr. S.M.H. Beheshti, Understanding the Qur’an (1985).
R. Bell, Introduction to the Qur’an (1953).
Source: http://www.aimislam.com