lexiconkabir:
Ya Albaqir, why dont you tell us your own opinion? But wait! Do you have another Quran other than the one compiled by uthman(r.a)? Are you claiming that there are ta'rif in the Quran we have at hand now, thereby calling Allah(subhanahu wa ta'ala) a liar(astagfirullah) since HE pronised to preserve the Glorious Quran from the slightest distortion?

Anyway, here is my opinion on the op:

In many instances two Sahih Hadith with two different rulings have been narrated on one issue, some Fuqahaa have taken one and the others have taken the other, thus leading to differences of opinion.

As for Bismillah and Surah Fatiha, Imam Shafi has taken the Hadith narrated by Abu Huraira mentioning that Bismillah is a part of Surah Fatiha. On the other hand Imam Abu Hanifah has taken another Hadith from Muslim in which it does not mention Bismillah as part of Surah Fatiha.

AlBaqir:


Honestly I can discuss anything but I hate discussion on tahrif of Quran unless my hands are forced. Your brothers started it esp Newnas. He wants to prove that Shia doesn't believe in the present Quran. Instead of you guys to caution him, he was supported in his fitnah. Like I said on the thread he created, both Schools have Mutawattir reports on tahrif of the Quran. Unfortunately Sunni documents are too numerous to count even in the two untouchable Sahihain (Bukhari and Muslim). And heavyweights Sunni sahabah confirmed tahrif. I have explore all that on the said thread. And there are still more. Just like Yoruba used to say, eni tábá fúni láso wò, aakó wo torun re Ni.

Lastly, Shi'i believe of Basmala is that it is the first verse of every Surah except Tawbah. In fact if you deliberately not recite it during Salat before you start al-Hamd or any other surah, your salat is void. And we believe whoever does not believe that Basmala is verse of every Surah except Tawbah, has affirm Tahrif of the Quran. And of course, we use the Uthmanic edition.

Farmerforlife:


Your post amounts to misinformation. The verses of the Quran were not numbered by the Prophet (ﷺ) or any of the companions. So whether you consider it as a verse on its own, or as the first verse of the surah, there is no difference as long as it retains its position in the mus-haf. Tahreef means changing words or phrases by later additions or omissions.

Farmerforlife:


Your citations of some sahabah on the Quran are also referring to abrogation by the prophet (ﷺ) before his death in response to the revelation of Allah, and not to changes made after his death by the companions as the Shiites believe.

AlBaqir:
[size=15pt]DISTORTION OF THE QURAN IN SUNNI AHADITH[/size]

Verse of stoning (Ayat Rajm)

#1. In a very long tradition, following are extracted from a sermon delivered by Umar ibn al-Khattab:

'Umar bin al-Khattab (RAA) narrated that he addressed the people and said, 'Verily Allah has sent Muhammad with the Truth and sent down the Book to him, and the verse of stoning was included in what Allah sent down. We recited, memorized and comprehended it. The Messenger of Allah (S) accordingly (to what was in the verse) stoned to death (whoever committed adultery while being married), and we stoned after his death. [size=15pt]But I am afraid that after a long time passes, someone may say, 'We do not find the Verses of stoning in Allah's Book[/size], and thus they may go astray by abandoning an obligation that Allah has sent down. Verily, stoning is an obligation in the Book of Allah to be inflicted on married men and women who commit adultery, when their crime is proven, evident by pregnancy, or through the confession (of the adulterer).'

Ref: Sahih al-Bukhari

Kitab Hudood - Book of limit and punishment set by Allah

Chapter: The Rajm of a married lady pregnant through illegal sexual intercourse

Sahih al-Bukhari 6830
In-book reference : Book 86, Hadith 57
USC-MSA web (English) reference : Vol. 8, Book 82, Hadith 817
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/86

# The implication of this is that uptill the Khilafah of Umar b. al-Khattab, "verse of stoning" was still part of the Quran. After all some sahih ahadith in Bukhari and Muslim testified Umar and Abu Bakr appointed Zaid to compiled Quran during the Khilafah of Abu Bakr.

#2. AISHAH ALSO TESTIFIED TO AYAT RAJM

It was narrated that 'Aishah said:

“The Verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed1, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.”

Grade : Hasan (Darussalam)

English reference : Vol. 3, Book 9, Hadith 1944; Arabic reference : Book 9, Hadith 2020
http://sunnah.com/ibnmajah/9

Verse of Rajm - verse of stoning, is NOWHERE in the present Quran. Who removed it?

#3. IBN ABBAS

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 (ورهطك منهم المخلصين )} was revealed Allah’s Apostle went out, and when he had ascended As-Safa mountain, he shouted, “O Sabahah!” The people said, “Who is that?” “Then they gathered around him, whereupon he said, “Do you see? If I inform you that cavalrymen are proceeding up the side of this mountain, will you believe me?” They said, “We have never heard you telling a lie.” Then he said, “I am a plain warner to you of a coming severe punishment.” Abu Lahab said, “May you perish! You gathered us only for this reason? ” Then Abu Lahab went away. So the “Surat:–ul–LAHAB” ‘Perish the hands of Abu Lahab!’ (111.1) was revealed.

Note: The cited version of Hadith can be read in Sahih Bukhari [English] Volume 6, Book 60, Number 495 but the English translator has failed to translate the portion i.e. ‘and thy group of selected people among them’.
http://sunnah.com/bukhari/65

# 4. IBN ABBAS

Imām al-Ṭaḥāwī (d. 361 H), in his Sharḥ Mushkil al-Athār (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risālah; 1st edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaūṭ], vol. 4, p. 249, documents:

Ibn Abī Maryam – al-Firyābī – Sufyān – Shu’bah – Ja’far b. Iyās – Mujāhid:

Ibn ‘Abbās said concerning His Statement, the Almighty, the Most Glorious {You who have īmān! do not enter houses other than your own until you have asked permission [tasta-nisū] and greeted their inhabitants} [24:27]: “The scribes made a mistake. It is only {until you have asked permission [tasta-dhinū]}.."

Shaykh al-Arnaūṭ says about the report:

Its chain is ṣaḥīḥ upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.

Here, Ibn ‘Abbās said that Qur’ān 24:27 contains a mistake, an error. He even gave the “correct” version of that āyah, and it is different from what we have today in the Qur’ān

NOTE: These are just FEW of authentic traditions of Ahlu Sunnah declaring there is Tahrif (distortions) in the Quran.

Farmerforlife:


The seven recitations of the Quran were dialect differences with the exact same meaning, which the prophet (ﷺ) stated was to make it lighter on the Arabs who spoke other dialects. No one was called upon to learn all 7 recitations, nor is there any evidence that the prophet himself (ﷺ) ever recited any qira'a other than the Qurayshi, which is what we have today, except for teaching those that found it easier to use. Again, by preventing the fitnah of conflicting recitations, Uthman (ra) simply left out those that were disemphasized by the prophet (ﷺ). This also is not tahreef, as the Quran is complete and present with us as the prophet (ﷺ) recited it in prayers and outside prayers.

Farmerforlife:


Your post is basically dishonest. So sorry.

AlBaqir:


Your opening statement revealed how insecure you are based on the fatawa of your Ulama. Anyway, I have beautifully explore the two contrasting opinions of your Shuyukh. You have the right to prove them wrong provided you have sahih evidence. My position as a follower of the school of Ahli Muhammad has been stated already.

AlBaqir:

However, saying boldly that Quran was not numbered at the time of Rasul or the sahabah simply suggests that the numbering as we have today is Bid'ah which of course is a misguidance which will lead to hell as sahih hadith states. Adding fuel to fire

Farmerforlife:


There is no insecurity there. The ulama differed on the numbering of the Bismillah as a verse, not on its presence there.

Farmerforlife:


This shows that you have little knowledge of the concept of bidah. For your information, the Quran is a recitation, and the mus-haf is a method used to make the recitation easier. Early on, there was not only no verse numbering, but also, no accent signs (short vowels) and the letters were unjoined. There were also no transliterations into other languages, no electronic masa-hef and no audio recitations. These were all later invented to make the recitation easier, as loud speakers are used today to make the adhan louder. The definition of bidah is not applicable here, as these are not fundamental acts of worship in themselves, but I doubt you will understand anyway.

Farmerforlife:


All the hadith you quoted are either weak, or refer to abrogation. For example, the verse of rajm was originally in the Quran, and was abrogated by the prophet (ﷺ), which is why Umar (ra), as well as Aisha (ra) affirmed that it was no longer there soon after the prophet's death. All such narrations by the sahabah are examples of abrogation, and abrogation is by Allah before the revelation was completed (cit. Q2:106).

Farmerforlife:


Furthermore, our Ulamah are unanimous in stating that anyone who asserts tahreef in the Quran is an unbeliever. What is your leaders' clear stance on this issue, please? Because to my knowledge, the twelver shia are the ONLY sect claiming that the Quran has been edited BY THE SAHABAH, and that their real Quran is in occultation with the mythical mahdi since 12centuries ago.

Farmerforlife:


Virtually all the hadith which include verses of the Quran recited by the prophet (ﷺ) were in the Qurayshi harf. The only proof we have of other huruf is narrations of dispute between two sahabah who learnt different huruf, or an occasional narration from a sahabi like ibn Abbass (ra), or at the time of collating the Mus-haf. This shows that the prophet (ﷺ) did not often resort to these huruf, but taught them to select people.

AlBaqir:


Nobody seem talking about the bold And when we talk about tahrif, you only succeeded in giving two examples out of many. The two fatawa of your Aimmah blew you up either way. Like I said you gave liberty to throw those fatawa or either of them into thrash can.



Well I guess you are a more relaxed non-bidiatic fellow. I have no problem whatsoever with those. But Absolutely all you have said up there are plain Bid'ah if I am to pay wahabi-ideology back in their own coin.



# First, you need to prove their weakness if any otherwise you have no excuse trying to daif any of those hadith.

# You can see how you contradicts yourself big time. @bold, you said Prophet abrogated ayat rajm. @underlined, Only Allah abrogates. If ayat rajm was once part of the Quran and later erased, which verse replaces it? Today the hukm of rajam is still intact yet your ideology is the verse has been abrogated. Smh.

# Second, you can never distort Umar's clear statement. That statement will always be hujjah against you. Umar confessed that uptill the time of his Khilafah, the verse of stoning is still in the Quran recited. And he predicted that people will say after sometimes that it cannot be found in the Quran.

Please try again later bro.




Kindly provide authentic Shi'i hadith with such statement. Simple!



That's tale by moonlight. Your hadith clearly confirmed 7 styles were revealed and completed for the Prophet by Jibril. Provide a single reference that it was Prophet himself that disemphasized the remaining six. After all that was your scholarly claim.

Farmerforlife:

Joining issues with you is obviously going to be a waste of time as you are deliberately trying to conflate issues and prolong the argument by intentionally misinterpreting what I state or looking for little tidbits of semantic flaws in my statements. Where a mistype of 'the prophet (ﷺ) abrogated it' becomes a basis for a 2 paragraph refutation, even though you very well understand that I meant that Allah abrogated it during the prophet's lifetime....duuh.
Secondly, at no point did Umar (ra) state that the verse of rajm was in the Quran until his khilafah, only that the the propht (ﷺ) stoned and Abubakr (ra) and he also stoned. The verse was lifted during the time if the prophet (ﷺ).
Next, numbering the verses is not a bidaa in the Salafist school of thought or any other. I do not expect you to understand the concept of bidaa, and you did not disappoint me. How could a shiite know about bidaa?
Lol at your demands for authentic shia hadith. There are simply none. In 12 centuries, the shia leaders have never compiled a book of hadith that they consider to be authentic. There are two explanations for these, either all your Ayatollahs are too lazy or busy sharing people's salaries of which they steal one fifth as khumus, or they are deliberately doing so to reserve the right to authenticate today and weaken tomorrow as they please, while keeping their laity in the dark. Pls dont ask me about authentic shia hadith again, because there are none. If you want shia stories about the Quran tahreef by the sahabah, read atTabrasi's 'scholarly' book quoting two thousand of these (by his own reckoning). Your apologist 'Ayatollah' Kamal Hydari has stated in a youtube video recently that there are more shia narrations proving the tahreef of the Quran than there are proving the imamah. I watched Qazwini also stating that the verses had been changed by the sahabah, and he even gave the 'right' recitation of the verse. Practically all your leaders believe this, and you know it, and I notice that you refuse to tell us what your leaders say concerning those who state that the Quran has been corrupted.
We are getting nowhere with this. Obviously, your agenda is to create doubt and shubuhaat in the minds of Muslims and attract unwary people to your creed of polytheism and vulgarity. For this, I have only one thing to say to you, the prophet (ﷺ) was not sent to take us out of idol worship to imam worship, but to monotheism. Nor did he promise that the way to paradise is by legalising promiscuity, lying and emotional orgies of self flagellation, head banging and shedding of copious quantities of crocodile tears. All your 11 'imams' were Sunni scholars who followed the sunnah of the prophet (ﷺ) and the khulafaa arRashideen after him.

Farmerforlife:


Joining issues with you is obviously going to be a waste of time as you are deliberately trying to conflate issues and prolong the argument by intentionally misinterpreting what I state or looking for little tidbits of semantic flaws in my statements. Where a mistype of 'the prophet (ﷺ) abrogated it' becomes a basis for a 2 paragraph refutation, even though you very well understand that I meant that Allah abrogated it during the prophet's lifetime....duuh.

Farmerforlife:


Secondly, at no point did Umar (ra) state that the verse of rajm was in the Quran until his khilafah, only that the the propht (ﷺ) stoned and Abubakr (ra) and he also stoned. The verse was lifted during the time if the prophet (ﷺ).

Farmerforlife:


Next, numbering the verses is not a bidaa in the Salafist school of thought or any other. I do not expect you to understand the concept of bidaa, and you did not disappoint me. How could a shiite know about bidaa?

Farmerforlife:


Lol at your demands for authentic shia hadith. There are simply none. In 12 centuries, the shia leaders have never compiled a book of hadith that they consider to be authentic. There are two explanations for these, either all your Ayatollahs are too lazy or busy sharing people's salaries of which they steal one fifth as khumus, or they are deliberately doing so to reserve the right to authenticate today and weaken tomorrow as they please, while keeping their laity in the dark. Pls dont ask me about authentic shia hadith again, because there are none. If you want shia stories about the Quran tahreef by the sahabah, read atTabrasi's 'scholarly' book quoting two thousand of these (by his own reckoning). Your apologist 'Ayatollah' Kamal Hydari has stated in a youtube video recently that there are more shia narrations proving the tahreef of the Quran than there are proving the imamah. I watched Qazwini also stating that the verses had been changed by the sahabah, and he even gave the 'right' recitation of the verse. Practically all your leaders believe this, and you know it, and I notice that you refuse to tell us what your leaders say concerning those who state that the Quran has been corrupted.

We are getting nowhere with this. Obviously, your agenda is to create doubt and shubuhaat in the minds of Muslims and attract unwary people to your creed of polytheism and vulgarity. For this, I have only one thing to say to you, the prophet (ﷺ) was not sent to take us out of idol worship to imam worship, but to monotheism. Nor did he promise that the way to paradise is by legalising promiscuity, lying and emotional orgies of self flagellation, head banging and shedding of copious quantities of crocodile tears. All your 11 'imams' were Sunni scholars who followed the sunnah of the prophet (ﷺ) and the khulafaa arRashideen after him.

MrOlai:


Jazakumullah khaeran my brother.

Please, I'll advice u not to join issue with him(Albaqir) except when it is neccessary to make clarification in order to protect people from being mislead by his antics. Don't give him attention at all. He is a chronic shia. He has called Abubakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha and other prominent Sahaba(R.A. Ajmain) munafiqun here times without number. He has rained curses on them here several times.

He is only looking unsuspecting muslims to deceive into his shi'ism. It's better not to give him attention at all so that all his evil plans would just die naturally within few minutes.

If you want to know more about him, just check his account profile. Check all his topics and post. You'll see all the evils he has said about the noble Companions and wives of the Prophet(SAW). He has accused Aisha and Hafsah(R.A.) of poisoning the Prophet(SAW) to death simply because they are daughters of Abubakr and Umar(R.A).

Please, just avoid him.

Jazakumullah khaeran once again for your contributions.

AlBaqir:

Really I thought after a long period of absence, where I guess you go for rehabilitation, I thought your sickness would have gone but obviously its increasing. May Allah cure you.

MrOlai:


Jazakumullah khaeran my brother.

Please, I'll advice u not to join issue with him(Albaqir) except when it is neccessary to make clarification in order to protect people from being misled by his antics. Don't give him attention at all. He is a chronic shia. He has called Abubakr, Umar, Uthman, Aisha and other prominent Sahaba(R.A. Ajmain) munafiqun here times without number. He has rained curses on them here several times.

He is only looking unsuspecting muslims to deceive into his shi'ism. It's better not to give him attention at all so that all his evil plans would just die naturally within few minutes.

If you want to know more about him, just check his account profile. Check all his topics and post. You'll see all the evils he has said about the noble Companions and wives of the Prophet(SAW). He has accused Aisha and Hafsah(R.A.) of poisoning the Prophet(SAW) to death simply because they are daughters of Abubakr and Umar(R.A).

Please, just avoid him.

Jazakumullah khaeran once again for your contributions.

Empiree:
This is honestly trivial issue borne out of jealousy btw Sunni/Shia. There is ONLY ONE Quran believed by ALL sects in Islam. Anything else is schism headed by shaytan.

Sunnis for the 1400 years never excommunicated Shia. It is only in recent years certain group in Sunnism began to excommunicate shi'i.

I declare my innocence from this type of argument. Both sides are GUILTY.

Farmerforlife:

You are wrong at bolded. The Twelver Shia, or Rafidha have been considered kuffar as far back as their first founder, who by all accounts was exiled or killed by Ali ibn abi Talib (ra) along with his followers. This is from the mouths of Shia scholars like anNawbakhti in his 'firaq asShia' or the shia book of rijaal... 'rijaal alkishshi'. I have many of these books downloaded on pdf. All leaders of maddhabs , almost all scholars have declared the Rafidha Shia heretics. Just scroll down to the bottom of the following link and you can see Maliki, Shafee, Hanafee and Hanbalee fatwas on them, 11 centuries before sheikh Muhammad bin AbdulWahhab (may Allah bestow His mercy upon him)...
http://forum.twelvershia.net/general-sunni-vs-shia/why-rafidi-12er-shiism-is-a-religionmadhab-of-kufr-and-zandaqah-(heresy)/
As a by the way, if you believe that the shia believe in our Quran, then you need to read the book by Hussein Nuri atTabrasi, a Shia muhaddith, titled 'faslul khitab fi tahreef kitab rabul arbab'... ie a narrative on the corruption in the Book of the Lord of lords...ie the Quran. Available for pdf download in Arabic with a Muslim scholar's commentary here...
http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=191700
Luckily, we can access all their books and video lectures now. Taqiyyah has become really difficult. Enjoy.

Farmerforlife:

Oh, I am familiar with the shia method of fixating on pointless shubuhaat to create confusion in the minds of Muslims through endless argument. They are paid agents trained in the hawzaat of Iran and sent to different countries to engage unwary Muslims in endless argument. The intention of their founder ibn Sabaa' the Jew has been to destroy Islam from within, targetting the ignorant. I have no real interest in them. If any Muslim tells me that he is getting doubts about whether they are right, I just point him/her to Youtube to watch numerous videos on shia denial of Allah, their generally evil and immoral mannered Ayatollats, and their statements on 'corruption' of the Quran caught for eternity on video for all to see. There are also excellent websites like www.youpuncturedtheark. www.twelvershia.net etc. if you prefer reading, although I advice at least some enlightening shia-exposing videos like anti-majos and shiaterminator among others which you can search for on youtube. Generally, the brother or sister's eye quickly opens. Some even become such vehement anti-shia that I sometimes have to cool them down on social media, lol. Arguing with them on fora like this just turns to "I say, you say". And they have one advantage over us in this type of argument which most ahlulSunnah brothers dont consider... the shia can and do engage in outright falsehood, lie about the prophet (ﷺ), engage in blatant tadlees of hadith, and generally behave in despicable conduct believing that Allah is rewarding them for their falsehood, whereas we cant. In the words of imam asShaf'ee (may Allah have Mercy on him)...
"I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah."
[narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]
Allahul musta'an.

Farmerforlife:

The Twelver Shia, or Rafidha have been considered kuffar as far back as their first founder, who by all accounts was exiled or killed by Ali ibn abi Talib (ra) along with his followers.

Farmerforlife:


"I have not seen among the heretics a people more famous for falsehood than the Rafidah."
[narrated by Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi/Al-Kifayah]

Allahul musta'an.

Farmerforlife:


As a by the way, if you believe that the shia believe in our Quran, then you need to read the book by Hussein Nuri atTabrasi, a Shia muhaddith, titled 'faslul khitab fi tahreef kitab rabul arbab'... ie a narrative on the corruption in the Book of the Lord of lords...ie the Quran. Available for pdf download in Arabic with a Muslim scholar's commentary here...

http://www.ahlalhdeeth.com/vb/showthread.php?t=191700

.

AlBaqir:


He, who lives in a glass house should not throw stones. If unsubstantiated opinion of a scholar can be used unwisely to represent the belief of all, then whatever is good for the goose is equally good for the ganger.

DOUBLE STANDARD

Shaykh Muḥammad Muḥammad ‘Abd al-Laṭīf Ibn al-Khaṭīb (died 1981 CE), one of the Sunnī scholars of Egypt, wrote a book called al-Furqān – first published in 1948 in Cairo by Dār al-Kutub al-Miṣriyyah, and then later re-published in Beirut by Dār al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah – to prove that taḥrīf truly took place. The book is 247 pages long; and in it, he has gathered Sunnī reports which support taḥrīf in it. Whosoever wishes to download that book in a scanned, PDF version should click this link( http://www.4shared.com/get/B0haEOof/___________.html).

In Egypt, Ibn al-Khaṭīb was a member of the Qur’ān Society, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Supreme Ṣūfī Council, and the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs. Therefore, he was not an obscure figure.

What about your salafs?
# Imām Sa’īd b. Manṣūr (d. 227 H) reports in his Sunan (Riyadh: Dār al-Ṣamī’ī; 1st edition, 1414 H) [annotator: Dr. Sa’d b. ‘Abd Allāh b. ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Āl Ḥumayyid], vol. 4, p. 1507, # 769:

Sa’īd – Abū Mu’āwiyah – Hishām b. ‘Urwah – his father (‘Urwah), who said:

I asked ‘Āishah concerning the grammatical errors of the Qur’ān: (Surely, those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Sabians [al-ṣābiūn]) [5:69], (And those who perform [al-muqīmīn] ṣalāt and give zakāt) [4:162] and (Verily, these two [hadhān] are magicians) [20:63]. So, she said, “O son of my sister, this is the handiwork of the scribes. They made mistakes in the Book.”

Dr. Sa’d Āl Ḥumayyid says: Its chain is apparently ṣaḥīḥ.

This ṣaḥīḥ Sunnī report suggests that Umm al-Mūminīn ‘Āishah believed that the Qur’ān in our hands contains grammatical errors, caused by the mistakes of the scribes who copied its manuscripts. Is that not taḥrīf ?!


# Moreover, Imām al-Ṭaḥāwī (d. 361 H) documents in his Sharḥ Mushkil al-Athār (Beirut: Muasassat al-Risālah; 1st edition, 1415 H) [annotator: Shu’ayb al-Arnaūṭ], vol. 4, p. 249:

Ibn Abī Maryam – al-Firyābī – Sufyān – Shu’bah – Ja’far b. Iyās – Mujāhid:

Ibn ‘Abbās said concerning His Statement, the Almighty, the Most Glorious {You who have īmān! do not enter houses other than your own until you have asked permission [tasta-nisū] and greeted their inhabitants} [24:27]: “The scribes made a mistake. It is only {until you have asked permission [tasta-dhinū]}.”

Shaykh al-Arnaūṭ comments: Its chain is ṣaḥīḥ upon the standard of the two Shaykhs.

Here, Ibn ‘Abbās (may Allāh be pleased with him) declared that the Qur’ān, as we know it, contains a mistake of the scribes. That is not taḥrīf, abi?

* These are pinch out of mountainous bag logs of evidence of Tahrif in Sunni sources

Farmerforlife:



First, the man is a Sufi heretic, the likes of ibn Arabi and Ahmad Tijjani likely, so if you have any issues with his book of tahreef, take it up with Empiree. You spare no effort in dividing Sunnis into wahhabis, salafists, sufis, and other when it fits your narrative, but you seem to have no problems with lumping them all together when it fits your desires. I have no hesitation in observing that our ulama have stated clearly that ANYONE who affirms corruption of the Quran is a kaffir. What of your leaders? Do they affirm this?

Farmerforlife:


As for the rest of the drivel you perpetually use as filler to bulk up your comments, I did not even read it. Probably it is the same morass of half lies and tadlees, .

Farmerforlife:


combined with narratioms concerning abrogation that you aways try to defend your belief in tahreef with.

AlBaqir:


Sufi ko, Diqbandi Ni. That's how thief like you hide once you are cornered.

Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, further states in his Majmū’ al-Fatāwā, vol. 12, p. 492:
http://islamport.com/d/3/tym/1/40/304.html

"Moreover, a lot of the Salaf made mistakes in a lot of these issues, and they agreed not to make takfīr on account of that. For instance, some of the Ṣaḥābah denied that the dead could hear the call of the living, and some of them denied that the mi’rāj took place in a state of wakefulness, and some of them denied that Muḥammad saw his Lord, and the opinion of some of them concerning the khilāfah and superiority (among them) is well-known. Likewise, there are well-known statements from some of them about the fighting of some others among them, the cursing of some others among them, and the total takfīr against some others among them.

Qāḍī Shurayḥ used to deny the qirāat of those who recited bal ‘ajibttu (“Nay, I wondered”) [37:12] and used to say that Allāh never wondered. This reached Ibrāhīm al-Nakha’ī and he said, “Shurayḥ is only a poet, who is dazzled by his knowledge. ‘Abd Allāh was more knowledgeable than him and he used to recite bal ajibttu.” So, he had denied a well-established qirāat and also denied a Divine Attribute which is proved by the Book and the Sunnah. Yet, the Ummah are unanimous that he was one of the Imāms.

Some of the Salaf were like that too. Some of them denied expressions used in the Qur’ān. For instance, one of them denied His Statement afalam yay-as al-ladhīna āmanū [13:31] and said, “It is only awalam yatabayan al-ladhīna āmanū.” Another (from the Salaf) denied the qirāat of His Statement wa qaḍā Rabbuka al-lā ta’budū’ ila iyyāhu [17:23] and said, “It is only wawaṣā Rabbuka.” One of them also expunged Sūrat al-Falaq and Sūrat al-Nās (from the Qur’ān), and another wrote Sūrat al-Qunūt, and this was an error by consensus and mutawātir reports."

AlBaqir:

As usual. Get cornered, tender silly excuse! The onus is on you to verify whether Umm al-mu'minin Aisha or hazrat Ibn Abbas did not made those submissions confirming errors in the Quran.



Abrogation ko, supplication Ni. We have, for example, submitted Umar ibn al-khattab's sermon where he confirmed ayat rajm being part of the Quran during his khilafah. Prove Umar wrong in this heresy for he predicated in the sermon that a time will emerge where people will say they cannot find ayat rajm in the Quran. Nothing like that exist.

Farmerforlife:


'Some of the salaf'? Qa'i Shuray one of the imams? Is that on facebook? And may I ask what the ibn Taimiyyah discourse above had to do with tahreef of the Quran? Do you even know the meaning of mutawatir? And are you going to give me an answer on what your leaders say concerning those who say the Quran is corrupt?

Farmerforlife:


Alhamdulillah you have admitted that Aisha is umm ulMu'mineen. That hadith was specifically declared weak by imam adDhahabi in Meezan ul Itidaal...

"This narrative is reported by Abu Mu`awiyah Mohammad ibn Khazim al-Tamimi al-Dharir al-Kufi to Ibn Hamid or Ibn Humaid. According to Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Hanbal, his father Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: Abu Muawiyah's narrations except those reported by Al-Aa`mash, are not reliable. Likewise, Abu Dawood states: I asked Ahmad ibn Hanbal: what do you think about the narratives of Hisham ibn `Urwah (another narrator in this narrative) that are reported by Abu Muawiyah? He replied: These narratives include such narratives that are not reliable. According to Ibn Kharrash, narratives reported by Abu Muawiyah are dependable if they come through Al-Aa`mash" end.

Farmerforlife:


As for the hadith of ibn Abbass (ra) who is actually a member of ahlul bayt, and which is actually lifted from tafseer ibn katheer but which shias dont cite because ibn Katheer stated that "this narration is extremely strange" from ibn Abbass, and ibn Hibban weakened it outrightly. So shias tend to cite obscure books when pointing out this hadith rather than just say that it is in ibn katheer and atTabari. So, just as I said earlier, half-lies and weak ahadith. Typical MO. I should have not wasted my time. And just to save you and save myself some more time, UNLIKE DOZENS OF SHIA LEADERS (not just one as you tried to insinuate), NO SUNNI SCHOLAR WOULD AUTHENTICATE A HADITH THAT SAYS THE QURAN IS CORRUPT... sorry for the caps. If the ulama say that a hadith has a good chain on the condition of such and such, this does not mean that the hadith is sahih. A good chain is not the only criteria for having an authentic hadith.

Farmerforlife:


Finally and for the umpteenth time, at no point did Umar (ra) say that the verse of rajm remained until his khilafah. Point out the phrase explicitly that said that. This is your own citation of the hadith...

'Umar bin al-Khattab (RAA) narrated that he addressed the people and said, 'Verily Allah has sent Muhammad with the Truth and sent down the Book to him, and the verse of stoning was included in what Allah sent down. We recited, memorized and comprehended it. The Messenger of Allah (S) accordingly (to what was in the verse) stoned to death (whoever committed adultery while being married), and we stoned after his death. But I am afraid that after a long time passes, someone may say, 'We do not find the Verses of stoning in Allah's Book, and thus they may go astray by abandoning an obligation that Allah has sent down. Verily, stoning is an obligation in the Book of Allah to be inflicted on married men and women who commit adultery, when their crime is proven, evident by pregnancy, or through the confession (of the adulterer).'

Where does Umar (ra) say that it was recited in his khilfah? Did you not do English comprehension in secondary school? He said it was part of the Book of Allah, and he is wary that in future, people would not stone because it had been abrogated from the Quran, and that it was the practice of the prophet (ﷺ), Abubakr and himself therefore an eatablished sunnah. Is that simple enough for you or should I further simplify? SMH.

AlBaqir:


You better remove the chewing gum on your eyes and stop disgracing yourself. Your Imam Ibn Taymiyyah "just" exposed some of your salaf.



Try harder. There is absolutely no doubt about anyone in that chain. All rookie stunt above is your formulation. We have given source to the hadith and its tahqiq. The submission of confirming the accuracy of the chain is clearly exposed in the Tahqiq of Dr. Sa'd al-Humayyid. It is your responsibility to look up the exposition.



See your life! "Lifted" from Tafsir ibn Kathir? Do you know the distance between Imam al-Tahawi and Imam Ibn Kathir? And you even have audacity to say Imam al-Tahawi's book is obscure. Your case is total failure. The moment you are cornered, you loose your balance. Anyway that's exactly what I expect.

# So, the fact that Ibn Kathir (despite no single reference) says the narration is strange and Imam Ibn Hibban (no reference again) weakened it, made you discard the hadith. Kindly point out on what exactly did they base their submission on? We have given you a modern day Salafi Sheikh, Shuaib al-Arnaut who did tahqiq of the book. And he proved the authenticity of the sanad of the hadith based on the criteria of the Shaikhain.

AlBaqir:

The underlines statement of Umar are enough and clear evidence in his affirmation of ayat rajm being part of the Quran as at his Khilafah. Twist and bend it with your obscure interpretation. You can never erase those statements.

AlBaqir:

Alhamdulillah there are lots of viewers reading all these conversations.

AlBaqir:
tintingz, kindly create time to read every part of this thread. Its about Quran.

AlBaqir:
^Once you finish barking, you will answer how Umm al-mu'minin Aisha and Abdullah ibn Abbas confirmed there are errors in the Quran as a result of scribe's mistakes. On your never ends copy-pasted thread, there are lists of evidences that exposed your Salaf and their thought on Tahrif documented as sihah (from Umar ibn al-Khattab, Ibn Mas'ud, Ibn Umar et al) but as usual with your die-hard attitudes of double standard and of late foul-mouthed languages, I expect nothing better. We have made our submissions clearer that Any Ayatullah or Shia scholar that believe and preaches Tahrif (in the Quran), does not confirm or hold the view of other Shia scholars or individuals who share contrary opinion. Unfortunately in your world of ignorance, such scholar (who believe tahrif) represent the whole shia world but those of yours that equally confirmed tahrif do not represent your entire manhaj. Sickness!

As far as Shi'i school is concern, there is no Taqlid in Aqeedah based issues. Only in fiqh that Taqlid is allowed
http://www.sistani.org/english/book/48/2116/