Der Quran ist seeehr komplex

[Gast Mustafa]

Asalamualaikum liebe Geschwister im Islam.

 

Und wenn ihr fürchtet, nicht gerecht gegen die Waisen zu sein,

so heiratet, was euch an Frauen gut ansteht, zwei, drei oder vier; und wenn ihr fürchtet, nicht billig zu sein, (heiratet) eine oder was im Besitz eurer rechten (Hand ist). So könnt ihr am ehesten Ungerechtigkeit vermeiden.[4:3]

 

In dem steten Bemühen, verbergen zu wollen, wie wenig wir über den Quran wissen, sehen sich viele gezwungen, zu interpretieren, damit es irgendwie passt.

 

Obige Ayat wird dann auch gelegentlich mit (Klammern) verunstaltet,

wie: ...(eurer Obhut anvertrauten weiblichen) Waisen...

oder: ...Waisen (als Ehefrauen)...

 

um das eigentlich offensichtliche zu vertuschen:

 

Und offensichtlich ist, mehr oder weniger /für den einen oder andern:

 

Und wenn ihr fürchtet, nicht gerecht gegen die Waisen zu sein,

 

hat mit dem Rest der ayat ziemlich wenig zu tun.

 

Und da ich selbst reichlich wenig Ahnung habe, antworte ich trotzdem mit folgender Hadith:

 

"I never heard any thing like a statement I heard from Imam abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) and it is almost as he said, ‘Pierced my heart.’" The Imam (a.s.) said, "My father narrated from my great-great-great-great grandfather, the holy Prophet (s.a.) who said, ‘Those who act on the basis of analogy will face their destruction and lead others to their destruction. Those who give fatwas without the knowledge of the abrogating and the abrogated, the clear text and that which requires interpretation, they will face destruction and lead others to their destruction."

 

wasalam.

Mustafa

[Gast Mustafa]

Asalamualaikum liebe Geschwister im Islam.

 

Er ist Derjenige, Der dir das Buch herabgesandt hat. Darin sind eindeutig klare Verse (ayat muhkamat) - sie machen die Grundlage des Buches aus ((Umm-al-Kitab) - und andere, die verschieden zu deuten sind. Doch diejenigen, in deren Herzen (Neigung zur) Falschheit ist, folgen dem, was darin nicht eindeutig ist, um Zwietracht (Fitna) herbeizuführen und Deutelei zu suchen, (indem sie) nach ihrer abwegigen Deutung trachten. Aber niemand kennt ihre Deutung außer Allah und diejenigen, die tiefbegründetes Wissen haben, die sagen: "Wir glauben wahrlich daran. Alles ist von unserem Herrn." Doch niemand bedenkt dies außer den Einsichtigen.[3:7]

 

Ein weiterer interessanter Vers, der gerade in diesem Kontext gerne zum verbreiten von Zwietracht strapaziert wird ist:

 

Wahrlich, Wir sind es Derjenige, Der die Ermahnung (den Quran) nach und nach hinabsandte, und gewiß, Wir sind ihm gegenüber zweifelsohne bewahrend.[15:9]

 

Viele Muslime werden von bestimmten Gruppen dazu bedrängt letztlich zu glauben, daß damit jede Kopie des Quran fehlerfrei sein müßte,

und wenn nicht das die Schlußfolgerung ihrer Agitation wäre,

wieviele Fehlerhafte Quran-Kopien dürfen sich wohl im Umlauf befinden, damit deren Argument (ihrer Auffassung nach) greift: 10 Stückk oder 6.000 ?

Oder wäre da eine relative Zahl lieber, sagen wir 66 % ?

 

Wer sich darüber auch nur ansatzweise im Klaren ist, daß man auch beim Abschreiben des Quran fehler machen kann,

wer sich darüber bewußt ist, daß jährlich Abertausende von Fälschungen ganz bewußt und mit Absicht in Umlauf gebracht werden,

der wird obigen Vers keineswegs derart absolut wortwörtlich verstehen, wie es einem unentwegt aufgedrängt wird.

 

Wenn es nicht möglich ist, diesen Vers als absolut wortwörtlich zu verstehen, muß man sich ein klein wenig mehr Gedanken dazu machen, auch wenn es anderen zuwider ist.

 

Allah sagt:

Allah löscht aus und läßt bestehen, was Er will, und bei Ihm ist die Urschrift des Buches (Umm-al-Kitab).[13:39]

 

Die Frage nach dem Wort von Allah, ist es erschaffen oder unerschaffen, hat schon so manchen braven Muslim den Kopf gekostet,

daher ist es keineswegs abwegig, ganz konsequent zu rekapitulieren: Ja der Quran ist unerschaffen und Nein, Tippfehler sind ausgeschlossen.

 

wasalam.

Mustafa

[Gast Fatima]

As-salamu alaikum,

 

das ist ein schwieriges und gefährliches Thema, über das sich schon Gelehrtere als wir die Köpfe zerbrochen haben. Ich bin überzeugt, dass der Quran unverfälscht ist, und das bedeutet auch nicht zwangsläufig, dass es keine Abschreibfehler geben kann, die von Menschen in Umlauf gebracht werden können.

Aber ich habe Probleme bei der Aussage, dass der Quran unerschaffen sei. Ist denn nicht alles von Allah erschaffen? Wie kann etwas Unerschaffenes neben Ihm existieren? Wie kam dann der Quran in die Existenz? Wäre das nicht so eine Art "Zweieinigkeit", das dem Tauhid-Prinzip widerspicht?

 

wassalam,

Fatima

[Gast Mustafa]

Asalamualaikum Schwester.

 

Ich halte mich nicht für einen Gelehrten, sondern für einen ganz einfachen Schüler.

 

Die Poente mit den Tippfehlern liegt in der Natur des Dilemmas jener Absolutheitsansprüche:

Wer behauptet, daß man den Quran unmöglich und in keinsterweise verfälschen kann, der hat es womöglich einfach noch nie selbst ausprobiert.

 

Sobald man dies zu relativieren beginnt, verstehen viele die Notwendigkeit, einer Korrekten Interpretation zu folgen.

 

Aber ich habe Probleme bei der Aussage, dass der Quran unerschaffen sei. Ist denn nicht alles von Allah erschaffen? Wie kann etwas Unerschaffenes neben Ihm existieren? Wie kam dann der Quran in die Existenz? Wäre das nicht so eine Art "Zweieinigkeit", das dem Tauhid-Prinzip widerspicht?

 

Es existiert ein Diesseitiges und ein Jenseitiges, und was im Diesseitigen weilt, ist erschaffen.

(Iblis z.B. hat das Jenseitige nie betreten.)

Da Allah sich nicht >ändert< kann sich auch sein jenseitiger Befehl nicht ändern.

M.E. ist jene Überlieferung zu seinen Namen ein guter Ansatz zum besseren Verständnis.

 

(Hier ein paar Ahadith nebenbei)

 

"I said to abu al-Hassan Musa ibn Ja‘far (a.s.), ‘Hisham ibn al-Hakam claims that Allah is a body like unto Whom there is no one. He is All-knowing, All-hearing, All-seeing, All-powerful. He speaks and reasons. His word, His power, His knowledge are all in one. No one of them is created.’" The Imam said, "May Allah be his foe. Does he not know that the body is limited, and that the speech is other than what the speaker is? I seek refuge from Allah and I disclaim such words. Allah does not have a body, form or any kind of limitations. Allah has created everything. He creates things as and when He wills without any word or planing in the mind or utterance of the tongue."

 

"...from abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) who has said, "The will is created."

 

"I asked Imam abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) about the words of Allah, the Most Holy, the Most High, ‘The spirit from Him’. Imam abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) replied, "It is the spirit (Ruh) from Allah created in Adam and Jesus."

 

Ali ibn Ibrahim has narrated from his father from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Hisham ibn al-Hakam who asked Imam abu 'Abdallah (a.s.) about the names of Allah and about the root or derivative forms of those names. "What is the root word for Allah?" The Imam replied, "The word Allah is derived from the word Elah (Lord) which requires Ma’luh (some one whose Lord one has become). Note that names are something other than whatever to which they apply. O Hissham, whoever, worships the name without the fact for which the name stands he has denied the existence of Allah and has not worshipped any thing. Whoever worships the name and the meaning for which the name stands he has worshipped two things. Whoever worships the meaning without the name he is a monotheist. Did you understand it ) O Hisham?" Hisham then asked, "Please explain further." The Imam then said, "Allah has ninety nine names. If names would have been the samething for which they stand every one of them would have been a Lord. However, Allah is a meaning for which these names stand and they all are something other than Him. O Hisham, bread is the name for a certain kind of food, water is the name for a certain kind of drink, cloth is the name for a certain kind of garment and fire is the name for a thing that burns. Did you understand, O Hisham, in a form of understanding that would help you to defend our cause against our enemies and those who worship things that are other than Allah?" I said, "Yes, I did receive such understanding." The Imam then said, "May Allah grant you success in it and keep you steadfast (in your belief). Hisham has said, "I swear by Allah that since then no one has been able to defeat me in an argumentation on the issue of the Oneness of Allah and that has made me reach this position that I hold."

 

 

Gerade wenn man selbst wenig Ahnung hat (so wie ich) hilft es ungemein, wenn man sich informiert. Hier also eine kleine Einleitung zum Thema von einem, der sicher als Gelehrter sicher einen ordentlichen Stellenwert verdient.

 

(Shiaencyclopedia)

 

Early Debates on the Integrity of the Quran (Part I)

 

[ This article is written by Professor Hossein Modarresi from Princeton University, NJ ]

 

This short article attempts to shed some light on the origins of the Sunnite-Shi'ite controversies on the integrity of the text of the Quran. The development of these debates in the first Islamic centuries represents an interest example of how ideas evolved in the early period through sectarian disputes, as well as contacts and communication between various Muslim sects and schools of thought. Despite severe mistrust, various factors existed to facilitate the give and take among different sects. Most prominent was a group of hadith transmitters who frequented different sectatrian camps and, thereby, introduced much of each sect's literature to the others. Often confusion on the part of these "bipolar" narrators of hadith helped "naturalize" segments of one sect's literature into that of another sect.

 

This was particularly true in Shi'ism, many of transmitters heard hadith from both Shitite and Sunnite sources, and later misattributed much of what they had heard.[1]

 

[1] Kashshi, Marifat al naqilin = Kitba al Rijal, abridged by Muhammad b. al Hasan al Tusi as Ikhtiyar Marifat ar Rijal p 590-91, where Shadhan b. Khalil al Naysaburi askes the celebrated hadith transmitter, Abu Ahmad Muhammad b. Abi Umayr al Azdi, who heard from bothe Shi'ite and Sunnite sources, why he never quoted any Sunnite hadith to his tudents in his works. He answered, that he deliberately avoided that since he found many of the Shi'ites studied both Shi'ites and Sunnites traditions, but later confused and ascribed Sunnite material to the Shi'ites sources and vice versa.

 

 

The early Shi'ite mutakallimun also quoted statements from the Sunnite sources in their polemics against the Sunnites as argumentum ad hominem. But from the mid 3rd/9th century onward, it was common for some Shi'ite authors and traditionisls to attribute a Shi'ite origin to this material, since it was thought that whatever the companions of the Imams and early Shl'ite mutakallimun said or wrote, even what they used in their polemics, necessarily represented the views and statements of the Imams.[2] This assumption led to the introduction of much alien material into Shi'ite thought.

 

[2] Kulayni, al Kafi, vol 1 p 99, Subhu al Salih, Mabahith fi ulum al Quran, p 134

 

Many of these early interchanges were forgotten over time.

Hence it was not known that many of the ideas that were later labeled as Sunnite, Shi'ite, or the like were originally held by a different group or, at least in the early period before the sects took on their final shape, were shared by various mainstream elements of Islamic society. The question of the integrity of the Uthmanic text of the Quran and the controversies surrounding it are a prime example of that phenomenon. The central issue in these debates was whether the Uthmanic text comprehended the entire body of material that was revealed to the Prophet, or whether there had been further material that was missing from the Uthmanic text. In the following pages, we shall examine the Sunnite-Shi'ite interchanges on this question.

 

 

 

The evidence in the text of the Qur'an itself as well as in hadith indicates that the Prophet compiled a written scripture for Islam

during his own life-time, most likely in his first years in Medina.[3] He reportedly continued until the end of his life to personally instruct the scribes where to insert new passages of the revelation in the scripture.[4]

 

[3] Zarkashi, al Burhan fi ulum al Quran, vol 1 p 235, 237-38, 256, 258, Suyuti, al Itqan fi ulum al Quran, vol 1 p 212-13, 216

[4] Ahmad b. Hanbal, vol 1 p 57, Tirimidhi, Sunan, vol 4 p 336-37, al Hakim al Naysaburi, al Mustadrak, vol 2 p 229

 

There are also indications that parts of earlier revelations were not included in the scripture. One verse in the Quran acknowledges the absence of a part of revelation which was abrogated or "caused to be forgotten, [5] another spoke of verses that God substituted for others.[6]

 

[5] Quran Chapter II Verse 106

[6] Quran Chapter XVI Verse 101

 

Early Muslims reportedly used to recall verses of the revelation they did not find in the new scripture. They were however, aware that those passages were deliberately excluded by the Prophet, since the Muslims frequently referred to them as what "abrogated" (nusikha), "lifted" (rufi'a), "caused to be forgotten" (unsiya), or "dropped't (usqita).[7]

 

[7] Abu Byad, al Naskih wa'l mansukh fi l Quran an al Karim, ed. John Burton (Cambridge 1987), p 6, Muhasibi, Fahm al Quran an wa manih ed. H. Quwwatli (in the collection of al Aql wa fahm al Quran [n.p., 1971] p 261-502), p 399 (quoting Anas b. Malik), 400 and 408 (quoting Amr b. Dinar), 403 (quoting Abd al Rahman b. Awf), 405 (quoting Abu Musa al Ashari), 406 Tabari, Jami al Bayan, vol 3 p 472-74, 476, 479-80, Ibn Salama, al Nasikh wa l mansukh, p 21 (quoting Abd Allah b. Masud), Suyuti, al Durr al manthur, vol 5 p 179 (quoting Ubayy b. Kab)

 

The concept of abrogation of the revelation (naskh al Quran) apparently referred originally to those parts that were not included by the Prophet in the scripture.[8]

 

[8] Abu Ubayd, al Naskih, p 6, Bayhaqi, Dalail al Nubuwwa, vol 7 p 154 (where it is argued that the Prophet never put the Quran together since there was always the expectation that some verses might be abrogated and some later modification was thus in-evitable in any collection of the Quran put together during his lifetime. Underlying this argument is the assumption that the abrogated verses had to be physically removed from the scripture.), Zarkashi, vol 2 p 30 (the first interpretation of the concept of naskh)

 

Later, however, the concept was developed in the Sunnite tradition to include several hypothetical categories, most of them with examples preserved in the present text of the Quran. With a single possible exception,[9] however, it is highly doubtful that the Qur'an includes any abrogated verse.

 

[9] Abu al Qasim al Khui, al Bayan, p 305-403

 

The Sunnite account of the collection of the Quran is completely different from the above. It contends that the Quran was not compiled in a single volume until after the Prophet died in the year 11/632.[10]

 

[10] Ibn Sa'd, Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, vol 3 p 211, 281, Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al Masahif, p 10, Ibn Babawayh, Kamal ad Din, p 31-32, Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 147-8, Zarkashi, vol 1 p 262, Ibn al Hadid, Sharah of Nahj al Balagha. vol 1 p 27, Ibn Juzayy, al Tashil li ulum al tanzil, vol 1 p 4, Suyuti, Itqan, vol 1 p 202, Ibrahim al Harbi, Gharib al hadith, vol 1 p 270

 

 

The "recorders of the revelation" (kuttab al-wahy) used to jot down the verses immediately after the Prophet received and recited them. Others among the faithful memorized portions of the revelation or occasionally recorded them on whatever primitive writing material was available. According to the supporters of this account, the fact that the Quran was not compiled as a book until the death of the Prophet is perfectly logical. As long as he was alive there was always the expectation of further revelation as well as occasional abrogations. Any formal collection of the material already revealed could not properly be considered a complete text. [11]

[11] Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 154, Zarkashi, vol 1 p 235, 262, Suyutim Itqan, vol 1 p 202, Ahmad al Naraqi, Manahij al ahkam, p 152

 

Many people had memorized large parts of the revelation, which they repeated in their prayers and recited to others. As long as the Prophet was living among the faithful as the sole authority there was no need for a formal reference book of religion or a code of law. All of these considerations would change after his death and the new circumstances would necessitate the collection of the Qur'an. The story as reported by the Sunnis sources is as follows:

Two years after the Prophet died, the Muslims were engaged in a bloody battle with a rival community at Yarnama in the deserts of Arabia. Many of the memorizers (qurra) of the Qur'an lost their lives at this time.[12]

Fearing that a great portion of the Qur'an would be lost should a similar situation arise and more memorizers of the Quran die, Abu Bakr, the first successor to the Prophet, ordered that the Qur'an be collected. To this end, the Prophet's companions and the memorizers of the Quran were asked to come forward with any parts of the revelation they had memorized or written down in any form. Abu Bakr ordered 'Umar, his succes- sor to be, and Zayd b. Thabit, a young recorder of revelation during the Prophet's lifetime, to sit at the entrance to the mosque of Medina and record any verse or part of the revelation that at least two witnesses testified that they had heard from the Prophet. In one particular case, though, the testimony of a single witness was accepted.[13]

 

[12] Yaqubi, Kitab al Tarikh, vol 2 p 15, most of the bearers of the Quran were killed during the battle. All together, some 360 persons among the distinguished companions of the Prophet lost their lives on that occasion.), Tabari, Tarikh, vol 3 p 296, Larger figures upto 500 for Ibn al Jazari, al Nashr, p 7, Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al Quran, vol 7 p 439, Qurtubi, al Jami li Ahkam al Quran, vol 1 p 50, and a figure of 1200 for Abd al Qahir al Baghdadi, Usul al Din p 283, are also given. The last figure is however the number of all Muslims who were killed in the battle, Companions and others see Tabari vol 3 p 300

[13] The case in question was the last two verses of Sura 9 in the present Quran which was added on the authority of Khuzayma b. Thabit al Ansari (or ABu Khuzayma according to some reports)., Bukhari, Sahih, vol 3 p 392-93, Tirimidhi, vol 4 p 346-47, Abu Bakr al Marwazi, Musnad Abi Bakr al Siddiq, p 97-99, 102-4, Ibn Abu Dawud, p 6-7, 9, 20, Ibn al Nadim, p 27, al Khatib al Baghdadi, Mudih awham al jam wa l tafrig, vol 1 p 276, Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 149-50

 

All of the material gathered in this manner was recorded on sheets of paper,[14] or parchment, but was not yet compiled as a volume. Furthermore, these materials were not made available to the Muslim community, which continued to possess the Qur'an only in its primitive scattered form. The sheets remained in the keeping of Abu Bakr and 'Umar, and after 'Umar's death they passed to his daughter Hafsa. 'Uthman took the sheets trom Hafsa during his caliphate and had them put toge- ther in the form of a volume. He had several copies sent to dif- ferent parts of the Muslim world and he then ordered that any other collection or portion of the Qur'an found anywhere else be burned.[15]

 

[14] Yaqubi, vol 2 p 135, Itqan, vol 1 p 185, 207, 208

[15] Bukhari, vol 3 p 393-94, Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347-8, Abu Bakr al Marwazi, p 99-101, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 18-21, Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 15051, Abu Hilal Askari, Kitab al Awail, vol 1 p 218

 

This whole story about the collection of the Qur'an was accepeed by the Sunnite scholars as trustworthy and served, as we shall see below, as the basis for the idea that later emerged of the incompleteness of the text of the Qur'an.

 

Sunnite literature contains many reports that suggest that some of the revelation had already been lost before the collection of the Qur'an initiated by Abu Bakr. It is reported, for example, that 'Umar was once looking for the text of a specific verse of the Qur'an he vaguely remembered. To his deep sorrow, he discovered that the only person who had any record of that verse had been killed in the battle of Yamama and that the verse was consequently lost.[16]

[16] Ibn Abi Dawud, p 10, Itqan, vol 1 p 204

 

Umar allegedly had a recollection of a Qur'anic verse on stoning as a punishment for adultery.[17]. But he could not convince his colleagues to insert it in the Quran because nobody else came forward to support him,[18] and the requirement that there be two witnesses for any text to be accepted as a part of the Qur'an was therefore not met. Later, however, some other Companions recalled that same verse,[19] including Aisha the Prophet's youngest wife. She is alleged to have said that a sheet on which two verses, including that on stoning, were recorded was under her bedding and that after the Prophel died, a domestic animal [20] got into the room and gobbled up the sheet while the household was preoccupied with his funeral. [21]

 

[17] Malik b. Anas, Muwatta, vol 2 p 824, Ahmad, vol 1 p 47, 55, Muhasibi, p 398, 455, Bukhari, vol 4 p 305, Muslim, Sahih, vol 2 p 1317, Ibn Maja, Sunan, vol 2 p 853, Tirmidhi, vol 2 p 442-3, Abu Dawud, Sunan, vol 4 p 145, Ibn Qutayba, Tawil mukhtalif al hadith, p 313, Ibn Salama, p 22, Bayhaqi, al Sunan al Kubra, vol 8 p 211, 213

[18] Itqan, vol 1 p 206

[19] Ahmad, vol 5 p 183 (quoting Zayd b, Thabit and Said al-As, Abd al Razzaq, AL Musannaf, vol 7 p 330, Itqan, vol 3 p 82, 86, al Durr al Manthur, vol 5 p 180 (quoting Ubayy b. Ka'b and Ikrima)

[20] Dajin can mean any kind of domestic animal, including fowl, sheep, or goat. A narrative in Ibrahim b. Ishaq al Harbis Gharib al hadith makes it more specific, as it uses the word shal, that is sheep or goat (see Zamakshari, al Kashaf, vol 3 p 518 footnote)

The same is in Qutaybas understanding from the word dajin in Tawil mukhtalif al hadith, p 310, apparently because of the context, since it is said that the animal ate the sheet of paper.

Also see Sulaym b. Qays al Hilali, Kitab Sulaymn b. Qays, p 108, Al Fadl b. Shadahn, al Idah, p 211, Abd al Jalil al Qazwini, p 133

[21] Ahmad, vol 4 p 269, Ibn Maja, vol 1 p 626, Ibn Qutayba, Tawil, p 310, Shafi'i, Kitab al Umm, vol 5 p 23, vol 7 p 208

 

Umar also remembered other verses he thought dropped out (saqata) from the Qur'an [22] or were lost, including one on being dutiful to parents[23] and another on jihad.[24]

 

[22] Mabani, p 99, Itqan, vol 3 p 84 (See Also And al Razzaq vol 7 p 379-80; Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 14 p 564, where the expression Faqadnah, "we lost it", is used). The expression "saqata" is also used by Aisha in the case of another phrase that alledgly "dropped out" from the Quran. See Ibn Maja, vol 1 p 625 (See also Itqan, vol 3 p 70), It is also used by Malik (Zarkashi, vol 1 p 263).

[23] Abd al Razzaq, vol 9 p 50, Ahmad, vol 1 p 47, 55, Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 7 p 431, Bukhari, vol 4 p 306, Ibn Salama, p 22, Itqan, vol 3 p 84, Zarkashi, vol 1 p 39 (Also quoted from Abu Bakr)

[24] Muhasibi, p 403, Mabani, p 99, Itqan, vol 3 p 84

 

His claim regarding the first of the two was supported by three other early authorities on the Qur'an: Zayd b. Thabit, 'Abd Allah b. 'Abbas, and Ubayy b. Ka'b.[25]

 

[25] Abd al Razzaq, vol 9 p 52, Muhasibi, p 400, Itqan, vol 3 p 84

 

Anas b. Malik remembered a verse which was revealed in the occasion of some Muslims who were killed in a battle, but was later "lifted".[26] Umar's learned son, 'Abd Allah [27] as well as some later scholars [28] maintained that much of the Qur'an had perished before the collection was made.

 

[26] Muhasibi, p 399, Tabari, Jami, vol 2 p 479

[27] Itqan, vol 3 p 81-82

[28] Ibn Abi Dawud, p 23 quoting Ibn Shihab (al Zuhri), Itqan, vol 5 p 179 quoting Sufyan al Thawri, Ibn Qutaybah, Tawil, p 313

Ibn Lubb, Falh al bab, p 92

 

 

Similar reports specifically addressed the official Uthmanic rescension of the Qur'an. They reported that many prominent Companions could not find in that official text portions of the reve- lation they had themselves heard from the Prophet, or found them in a different form. Ubayy b. Ka'b, for instance, recited sura 98 (al Bayyina) in a form he claimed to have heard from the Prophet. It included two verses unrecorded in the Uthmanic text. (29) He also thought that the original version of sura 33 (al-Ahzab) had been much longer, from which he specifically remembered the stoning verse that is missing from the Uthmanic text.[30] His claim was supported by Zayd b. Thabit,[31] by Aisha who reported that during the Prophet's lifetime the sura

was about three times as long, although when Uthman collected the Qur'an he found only what was made available in his text,[32]

and by Hudhayfa b. al-Yaman (who found some seventy verses missing in the new official text, verses that he himself used to

recite during the lifetime of the Prophet.[33]

 

 

[29] Ahmad, vol 5 p 132, Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 370, Hakim, vol 2 p 224, Itqan, vol 3 p 83

[30] Ahmad, vol 5 p 132, Muhasibi, p 405, Bayhaqi, vol 8 p 211, Hakim, vol 2 p 415, Itqan, vol 3 p 82 (the same claim about the size of the Sura and it included the stoning verse is quoted from Umar anmd Ikrima in Suyuti, al Durre Manthur, vol 5 p 180) Zarkasi, vol 2 p 35, where the verse is said to to have been in Sura 25 (al Nur), and with Mabani, p 82, where Sura 7 (al Aaraf) is mentioned instead. This latter is however a slip of the pen or mis spelling as evidenced by the author's later mention of the Sura al Ahzab in p 83 and 86

[32] Al Raghib al Isfahani, Muhadarat al Udaba, vol 4 p 434, Suyuti, al Durre Manthur, vol 5 p 180, Itqan, Suyuti, vol 1 p 226

[33] Suyuti, al Durre Manthur, vol 5 p 180, quoting from Bukhari book, Kitab at Tarikh

 

Hudhayfa also contended that Sura 9 (al-Bara'a in its Uthmanic form was perhaps one-fourth[34] or one-third[35] of what it had been during the time of the Prophet, an idea later supported the prominent 2nd/8th century jurist and traditionist Malik b. Anas, founder of the Maliki school of Islamic law.[36] There are also reports that Suras 15 (al-Hijr) and 24 (al-Nur) had once been of a different length.[37]

And Abu Musa al-Ash'ari recalled the existence of two long suras (one verse of each he still remembered) that he could not find in the present text.[38] One of the two verses he recalled ("If the son of Adam had two fields of gold he would seek a third one...") is also quoted from other Companions such as Ubayy [39], Ibn Masud [40], and Ibn 'Abbas [41].

 

[34] Hakim, vol 2 p 331, Haytami, Majam al Zawaid, vol 7 p 28-29, Itqan, vol 3 p 84

[36] Zarkshi, vol 1 p 263, Itqan, vol 1 p 226

[37] Sulaym, p 108, Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, al Intijaj, vol 1 p 222, 286, Zarkshi, vol 2 p 35

[38] Muslim, vol 2 p 726, Muhasibi, p 405, Abu Nuaym, Hilyat al Awliya, vol 1 p 257, Bayhaqi, Dalai, vol 7 p 156, Itqan, vol 3 p 83

[39] Ahmad, vol 5 p 131-32, Muhasibi, p 400-01, Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 370, Hakim, vol 2 p 224

[40] Raghib, vol 4 p 433

[41] Itqan, vol 1 p 227

 

Maslama b. Mukhallad al-Ansari offered two further verses that are not in the Uthmanic text [42] and Aisha came forward with a third [43].

 

[42] Itqan, vol 3 p 84

[43] Abd al Razzaq, vol 7 p 470, Ibn Maja, vol 1 p 625, 626

 

Two short chapters known as Sural al-Hafd and Sura al-Khal were recorded in the collections of Ubayy [44], Ibn Abbas and Abu Musa [45].

They were allegedly also known to Umar [46] and other Companions [47] although no trace of either chapter is found in the of official text. Ibn Masud did not have Suras 1, 113, and 114 in his collection [48] but he had some extra words and phrases that were missing from the Uthmanic text [49].

 

[44] Muhasibi, p 400-1, Ibn al Nadim, p 30, Raghib, vol 4 p 433, Zarkashi, vol 2 p 37, Haytami, vol 7 p 157, Itqan, vol 1 p 226, 227

[45] Itqan, vol 1 p 227

[46] Itqan, vol 1 p 226-7

[47] Itqan, vol 1 p 227, vol 3 p 85

[48] Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 146-47, Ahmad, vol 5, p 129-30, Ibn Qutayba, Tawail mushkil al Quran, p 33-34, Ibn al Nadim, p 29

Baqillani, al Intisar, p 184, Raghib, vol 4 p 434, Zarkashi, vol 1 p 251, vol 2 p 128, Haytami, vol 7 p 149-50, Itqam, vol 1 p 224, 226, 270-73

[49] Arthur Jeffrey, Materials for the History of the Text of the Quran, the Old Codices, p 20-113

 

He and many other Companions also preserved some verses that differed from the official text [50]. There were also widely transmitted reports that after the death of the Prophet, 'Ali put all the parts of the Qur'an together [51] and presented it to the Companions; hut they rejected it, and he had to take it back home [52]. These reports also suggested thal there were substantial differences between the various versions of the Qur'an.

 

[50] See the lists, Ibid, p 114-238

[51] Ibn Sa'd, vol 2 p 338, Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 148, Yaqubi, vol 2 p 135, Ibn Abu Dawud, p 10, Ibn al Nadim, p 30, Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219-20, Abu Buaym, vol 1 p 67, Ibn Abd al Barr, al Istiab, p 333-34, Ibn Juzay, vol 1 p 4, Ibn Abi al Hadid, vol 1 p 27, Itqan, vol 1 p 204, 248, al Kafi, al Kulayni, vol 8 p 18

[52] Sulaym, p 72, 108, Basair al Darajat, p 193, Kulayni, vol 2 p 633, Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, vol 1 p 107, 255-28, Ibn Shahrashub, Manaqib Al Abi Talib, vol 2 p 42, Yaqubi, vol 2 p 135-6

 

...

[Gast Mustafa]

Early Debates on the Integrity of the Quran (Part II)

 

It is universally acknowledged in the Islamic tradilion - based on the collective memory of the early generations of Muslims rather than simply on a number of isolated reports that Uthman promulgated an official rescension of the Qur'an and banned all other versions. There were certainly differences between that official Quran and other early codices as there were differences among the variant codices themselves. It was, after all, those differences that necessitated the establihment of a standard and universally accepted text.

 

It is conceivable that close associates of the Prophet, especially those who had joined him during his years in Mecca, still remembered parts of the revelation that had not been included by the Prophet in the Qur'an.

It is also plausible to speculate that Ali whose version of the Scripture might have been one of the most complete and authentic, had offered it to Uthman to be consecrated as the official text, but that his offer was rejected by the caliph who preferred to select and combine elements of all the competing early codices.

This in turn may have caused 'Ali to withdraw his manuscript as a basis for compiling of the official rescension.

Another Companion, 'Abd Allah b. Mas'ud, is also reported to have stood aloof from the process and to have declined to offer his own text.[53]

 

[53] Ibn Abi Dawud, p 15-17, Ibn Asakir, Tarikh madinat Dimashq, vol 39 p 87-91

 

The foregoing account of the first compilation of the Qur'an is, otherwise, extremely problematic [54]. Despite the significance of this report, it does not appear tn any work written by scholars of the 2nd/8th and early 3rd/9th centuries [55].

 

[54] A.T Welch p 404-5 and the sources quoted therein

[55] Thus the story doesn't appear in for instance in Tabaqat of Ibn Sa'd in sections of Abu Bakr, Umar and Zayd b. Thabit, nor in Musnad Ahmad Hanbal or Fadail as Sahaba where he gathered so may reports about their virtues and good services to Islam.

 

Some details of the story reportedly took place later at the time that Uthman ordered the creation of a standard Qur'an [56]. Several reports categorically deny that any official attempt to collect the Qur'an was made before 'Uthman's time [57], an assertion reportedly supported by the collective recollections if the Muslim community [58].

 

[56] Bukhari, vol 3 p 392-93, vol 4 p 398-99, Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 7-9, 20, 29 with Bukhari vol 3 p 393-94,

Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 17, 19, 24-26, 31, Ibn Asakir, Tarikh, Biography of Uthman p 236

[57] Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 170, Zarkashi, vol 1 p 241, Other reports suggest that the collection of the Quran had

already been started during the time of Umar, but he died, before the project was completed during the caliphate of Uthman (Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219)

[58] Zarkashi, vol 1 p 235, Itqan, vol1 p 211, Ibn Asakir, p 243-46

 

Different versions of the story reveal major contradictions in regards to some of its main particulars. The name of the Companion whose testimony alone was accepted [59] and the precise verses in question [60] vary. Contradictory accounts are also given of the role of Zayd b. Thabit in the compilation process [61].

 

[59] He is (a) Khuazyma b, Thabit al Ansari in Bukhari vol 3 p 310, 394

Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347, Abu Bakr al Marwasi, p 103, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 7, 8, 9, 20, 29, 31, Bayhaqi, Dalial, vol 7 p 150, and

(B) Abu Khuzayma (Aws b. Yazid) in Bukhari, vol 3 p 392-93, Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348, Abu Bakr al Marwazi, p 99, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 19, Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 149, and

© an un-identified man of Ansar in Ibn Abi Dawud, p 8, Tabari, Jami, vol 14 p 588, and

(d) Unayy in Ibn Abi Dawud p 9, 30, Khatib, Talkhis al Mustadrak, vol 1 p 403, There are also reports which indicate that Ubayy not only knew these verses he knew that they were the last to have been revealed to the Prophet, too (Tabari, Jami, vol 14 p 588-89)

[60] It is the last two verses of Sura 9 in Bukhari, vol 3 p 392-93, Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 347, ABu Bakr al Marwazi, p 99, 103, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 7, 9, 11, 20, 29, 30, 31, Tabari, Jami, vol 14 p 588, Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 149, and Verse 23 of Sura 33 in Bukhari, vol 3 p 310, 393-94, Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 8, 19, Bayhaqi, Dalail, vol 7 p 150, Khatib, Mudih, vol 1 p 276

[61] In the above cited account of the collection of the Quran he is the one who undertook the task of putting the Quran together in two stages during the times of Abu Bakr and Uthman. Some other reports ascribe the collection of the Quran, including Zayd's participation in it, to the period of Uthman (Bukhari, vol 3 p 393-94; Tirmidhi, vol 4 p 348; Ibn Abi Dawud, p 31; Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 234-36)

Other reports don't mention his name at all (Ibn Abi Dawud, p 10-11)

Yets others assert that he had already collected the Quran doing the time of the Prophet, putting together all the fragments of it which were recorded on various sorts of primitive writing material, as in Tirmidhi, vol 5 p 390, Hakim, vol 2 p 229, 611, In another report, however, he is quoted as stating by the time the Prophet died, the Quran had not been collected, as in Itqan, vol 1 p 202

 

 

The inclusion of the clause related to the acceptance of the testimony of one man alone is an obvious attempt to make the story more acceptable through references to the familiar and widely quoted story Khuzayma Dhu 'l-Shahadstayan, a man whos single testimony was aid to have been accepted by the Prophet as equivalent to the testimony of two witnesses [62].

 

[62] Bukhari, vol 3 p 310, Ibn Abi Dawud, p 29, Khatib, Mudih, vol 1 p 276, Itqan, vol 1 p 206

 

In a variation of this story, in which the witness is an unidentified man from Ansar, Umar is reported to have accepted the testimony of this single witness on the grounds that the message of the verse he offered was, in Umar's judgement, true since the verse described the Prophet with qualities that he had really possessed [63].

 

[63] Tabari, Jami, vol 16, p 588

 

In other variations. The verse or verses were said to have been accepted because 'Umar [64], Uthman [65] or Zayd [66] themselves testified that they, too, had heard those Verses from the Prophet; or, alternatively, because the caliph had generally ordered that anybody's testimony be accepted provided that he took an oath that he had personally heard from the Prophet the verse or part that he offered for inclusion [67].

 

[64] Ibn Abi Dawud, p 30

[65] Ibid, p 31

[66] Ibid, p 8, 19, 29

[67] Ibn Asakir, p 236, where the episode is ascribed to the period of Uthman who asked the Muslism to come forward with whatever part of the Quran they had in hand. The Muslims came forward with whatever primitive writing material on which they had recorded parts of the Quran. The Uthman asked every single one to swear that he had personally heard what he had offered as a part of the Quran from the Prophet. He then ordered the collected material to be put together as Scriptures.

In an obvious attempt to purge the sotry of these terrible contradictions a variation of it was authored by some later transmitters that suggested that (a) the collection of the Quran started during the reign of Abu Bakr but could not be completed before his death and was put together during the reigns of Umar, that (B), Zayd was the one who wrote the Quran first during the time of Abu Bakr on primitive writing material and then on paper during the time of Umar, that ©, there was no question of testimony or witness, but rather Zayd himself after completing the text once went ovr it and could not find Verse 33:23. He then looked around for it, untill he found the record of it with Khuzayma b. Thabit. He then went over the text once more and this time noticed that the Verses 9:12-129 were missing, so he looked around again untill he found the record with another man who was incidently called Khuzayma as well. When he went over the text for the third time, he found no problem and so the text was completed. (Tabari, Jami, vol 1 p 59-61)

 

Moreover, the story contradicts numerous and widely transmitted reports [68] which assert that a number of the Companions, notably Ali, Abd Allah b. Masud and Ubayy b. Kab, had collected the Qur'an during the time of the Prophet [69].

 

[68] The list of the early collectors of the Quran is different in different sources, for instance, Ibn Sa'd, vol 2 p 112-14, Ibn al NAdim, Kitab al Fihrist, p 30, Tabarani, al Mujam al Kabir, vol 2 p 292, Baqillani, p 88-90, Dhahabi, al Maridat al qurra al kibar, vol 1 p 27, Zarkashim vol 1 p 242-43, Qurtubi, vol 1 p 57, Itqan, vol 1 p 248-49, quoting Abu Ubayd in his Kitab al Qira'at

[69] In order to remove the obvious contradictions between these reports and the story in question, the supporters of the story have offered two suggestions. According to one, those who are said to have collcted the Quran during the time of the Prophet, had each made a collection of only a part of the revelation, not a complete version. According to the other, the word "collected", had to be understood to mean that those Companions memorized the Quran during the time of the Prophet, not they they had put a complete record of it together. As mentioned in Ibn Abi Dawud, p 10, Itqan, vol 1 p 204

 

Furthermore, a clear and suspicious attempt seems to have been made to somehow credit the first three caliphs with achieving the compilation of the sacred scripture of Islam to the exclusion of the fourth, Ali.

 

 

 

Early Debates on the Integrity of the Quran (Part III)

 

This latter point, when compared with the reports cited above on Ali's collection of the Quran after the death of the Prophet, may shed some light on the origins of the story.

Taking into account some of the early political, and later polemical, disputes within the Muslim community, one may suggest the existence of a multi-stage process in the formation of that account. There was apparently a widely circulating rumor In the first century ot the Hijra to the effect that Ali did not attend the public meeting at which Abu Bakr was declared ruler after the death of the Prophet, and that it also took some time before he swore his allegiance to Abu Bakr.

From early times the partisans of Ali have interpreted this as a reflection of his dissatisfaction with the choice of Abu Bakr and used this conclusion as a basis from which to attack the allege consensus of the Companions which was put forward by the supporters of the caliphs as the legal hasis for the validity of Abu Bakr's succession to caliphate.

This line of argument seems also have appeared quite early; possibly even before the decline of the Umayyads in the early 2nd/8th century whem sectarian debates began to flare in the Muslim community [70].

 

[70] For instance the poem attributed to Ali in the Sharif al Radi, Nah al Balagha, p 503, "If you (claim that you) have come to power on the basis of consultation, how did then it happen while those who had to be consulted were absent."

 

With the decline of the Umayyads, 'Ali could no longer be ignored and a response had to be found. Many of the reports which alleged that 'Ali retreated from public life after the death of the prophet in order to put the Qur'an together mention this as the explanation for his failure to tender an early allegiance to the caliph [71]. It seems very likely [72], therefore, that these reports were composed - using as background material some pre-existing reports and recollections concerning Ali [73] - the sectarian purpose of suggesting that Ali's delay was not a sign of his dissatisfaction. Instead, Ali was quoted as telling Abu Bakr (when the caliph asked him whether he had failed to swear allegiance because he was unhappy with Abu Bakr's election) that he "had vowed to God not to put on his outside garment except for attending the communal prayer, until such a time as he had put the Qur'an together." [74]

 

[71] Ibn sa'd, vol 2 p 101, Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 148, Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219-20, Ibn ABi Dawud, p 10, Itqan, vol 1 p 204

[72] Alternatively, there might actually have existed some rumours suggesting that Ali, having noticed that the Seniors of Quraysh

had chosen one among themselves as the succesor to the Prophet and having decided to withdraw from the public, kept himself busy with the Quran and took that as an excuse not to participate in any social activity. The Sunnites, however, put forward that excuse as the real cause and denied that 'Ali was unahppy with the Quraysh process of Caliph making.

[73] Ali was among one of the early collectors of the Quran, one of those who collected it during the life time of the Prophet as

mentioned in Ibn Asakir, vol 39 p 80.

Ali was known for his vast knowledge and of special dedication to the Quran. (Ibn Sa'd vol 1 p 204)

In his codex of the Quran he had reportedly indicated the verses which were abrogated and those which abrogated them (Itqan, vol 1 p 204).

The exact timing of when he had offered the codex for the official consecration was already blurred by the early 2nd/8th Century.

The Shi'ites themselves were now attributing it to the time of Umar (Sulaymn, p 108, also quoted by Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, vol 1 p 228, vol 2 p 7), but a vague memory of it was presumably still extant.

[74] Abu Mansur al Tabrisi, vol 1 p 71.

 

The point that these reports had an anti Shi'ite polemical application can also be attested to by the fact that in some of its later versions, the report is quoted by the Sunnites on the authority of Jafar al Sadiq, who quoted it from his fore fathers (Abu Hilal al Askari, vol 1 p 219)

It was a common practice in the sectarian reports to put the idea on the tongue of the respected authority of the opponent, a practice which can also be observed in the cases which shortly follow in the discussion above. (See also Kashshi, p 393-97)

 

The episode, however, created other problems for the supporters of orthodoxy for it added another item to the list of Ali's special privileges used by the Shi'ites to argue with for his claim to the caliphate. In addition to all his other alleged merits, he was now the one who had undertaken the critical task of assembling the Islamic scripture after the death of the Prophet [75].

 

[75] Kitab Mihnat Amir al Muminin (an early Shi'ite text preserved in Pseudo Mufid, al Ikhtisas, p 157-75), p 164, Sulaymn, p 113, 120

 

This was potentially a dangerous weapon in the hands of his partisans in sectarian debates. The partisans of 'Ali might have already used it against the Uthmaniyya, to counter their argument in support of 'Uthman on the basis that he was the one who established the official and standard Qur'an. For the Uthmaniyya that constituted a real challenge that they met, as in many other cases, by seeking to undermine Shi'ite claims for the special quality of Ali or the House of the Prophet.

Some examples are as follows [76]:

 

[76] For other interesting examples see Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 146-68. 290-94

 

1. Many reports suggest that the Prophet chose Ali as his brother [77] at the time that he established the "brothering" among his followers [78].

A counter report claims this status for Abu Bakr [79], though it is widely believed that the Prophet made Abu Bakr and ' Umar brothers [80].

Many other reports quote the Prophet as saying that "if I could adopt an intimate friend I would adopt Abu Bakr, but your colleague (i.e. the Prophet) is already taken by God as His intimate friend." [81] These seem to have been composed to counter the claim of Ali's selection as the Proephet's brother.

 

[77] Nur Allah al Tastari, Ihqaq al haqq, vol 4 p 171-217; vol 6 p 461-86, p 450-17; vol 20 p 221-55, Abd al Husayn al Amini, vol 3 p 113-25

[78] Muakhat in the Encyclopedia of Islam, 2nd ed, vol 7 p 253-54

[79] Ahmad b, Handal, Fadail al Sahaba, p 99, 166-7, 378, Bukhari, col 3 p 113-25

[80] Ibn Sa'd, Tabaqat, vol 3 p 123

[81] Ahmad, Fadail, p 99, 166-67, 177, 183-84, 378-79, 411

 

2. The partisans of Ali regarded him as the most excellent among the companions of the Prophet. Indeed, there are many

indications in the history of the Prophet that Ali was in fact one of the pre-eminent Companions. An obviously pro-Uthmaniyya

report, however, emphasized that during the time of the Prophet only Abu Bakr ' Umar and ' Uthman were pre-eminent. All

others followed with no distinctions of status or eminence. [82]

 

[82] Ahmad, Fadail, p 86-92, Biography of Uthman, p 153-59, Bukhari, vol 2 p 418

 

3. In an oft-quoted statement ascribed to the Prophet, he is reported as having called his two grandsons by Fatima- al Hasan

and al-Husayn-the "two masters of the youth of Paradise [83]. Another report from the Prophet applies the same epithet to Ali [84]. A counter report calls Abu Bakr and Umar the to masters of the middle-aged of the paradise [85].

 

[83] Tustari, vol 10 p 544-95; vol 19 p 232-51

[84] Ibn Asakir, Tarikh madinal Dimashq, Section on the Biography of Ali, vol 2 p 260

[85] Ibn Sa'd, vol 3 p 124, Ahmad, Fadail, p 158-59, 771, 774, 780, 788, Daylami, vol 1 p 530

 

4. A widely circulating statement attributed to the Prophet sta ted that he was the city of knowledge for which 'Ali was the gate [86]. A counter statement described Abu Bakr as the foundation of the city, 'Umar as the wall and 'Uthman as the ceiling [87].

 

[86] Tustari, vol 5 p 468-515; vol 16 p 277-309; vol 21 p 415-28, Amini, vol 6 p 61-81

[87] Daylami, vol 1 p 76

 

 

5. It is reported that during the early years of the Prophet's stay at Medina, the Companions who had their houses around the mosque of the Prophet had opened exit doors from their houses into the mosque in order to make it easier for themselves to attend the communal prayer there with the Prophet. According to a widely quoted report, the Prophet later ordered all those doors to be closed, excepting only the door that led from the house of Ali, which was virtually the door leading from the house of the Prophet's daughter [88]. (The exception was not, therefore, to signify a merit or to establish a special status for Ali himself.)

A counter report, however, tried to establish that it was the door from the house of Abu Bakr which was the exception [89].

 

[88] Ahmad, Fadail, p 581-82, Tustari, vol 5 p 540-86; vol 16 p 332-75; vol 19 p 243-55; Amini vol 6 p 209-16

[89] Bukhari, vol 2 p 418; Ahmad, Fadail, p 70-71, 98, 152, 379

 

6. It is unanimously believed that during a ceremonial imprecation that took place between the Prophet and the Christians of Najran towards the end of the Prophet's life [90] he brought with him the members of his immediate family 'Ali, Fatima, and their two sons [91].

This clearly followed the traditional rules for the Arabs' custom of the mutual curse, which required each party to attend in the company of his own household.

A counter report however, asserts that the Prophet. was accompanied to the ceremony by Abu Bakr and his family, 'Umar and his family and Uthman and his family [92].

 

[91] Tustari, vol 3 p 46-62; vol 9 p 70-91; vol 14 p 131-47, vol 20 p 84-87

[92] Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 168-89, quoting on the authority of Imam Jafar al Sadiq, who acordingly related it from his father.

As noted above, this was a common phenomenon in this genre of material which was auhtored for anto Shi'ite polemical purposes.

 

7. According to a widely transmitted report, the Prophet described Fatima, Ali and their two sons as constituting his own household [93]. This definition of the Prophet's house is supported by almost all early Muslim authorities [94]. A clearly pro Uthmaniyya report, however, quoted the Prophet as saying that Ali, al-Hasan, al-Husayn and Fatima were his own household while Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and A'isha were the household of God [95].

 

[93] Tustari, vol 2 501-62; vol 3 p 513-31; vol 9 p 1-69; vol 14 p 40-105 vol 18 p 359-83

[94] Tabari, Jami al Bayan, vol 22 p 6-8

[95] Daylami, vol 1 p 532, Tabari, Jami, vol 22 p 8 quotes that Ikrima, a tabi'i well known for his anti Alid tendencies was crying in the market, that the household of the Prophet were his wives only.

 

 

It seems safe to assume that this same model was followed with respect to the reports about Ali's collection of the Qur'an and that the story in question was composed as part of an anti-Shl'ite polemic.

The process seems to have beglin with assertions that, with the exception of Uthman, none of the caliphs or any of the Companions collected the Qur'an [96] some made the point more emphatically and stipulated that Ali, in particular, passed away before he could collect it [97].

 

[96] See above footnote 57

[97] Ibn Asakir, Biography of Uthman, p 170

 

 

(In reality, of course, not only did Ali witness the collection of the Qur'an, he did not die until years after the official Qur'an had been established.) Another report asserted that the first person to collect the Qur'an was Salim, a client of Abu Hudayfa, who after the death of the Prophet "vowed to God not to put on his outside garment until such a time as he had put the Quran together."[98] This is exactly the statement attributed to Ali in other reports.

 

[98] Itqan, vol 1 p 205, quoting Ibn Ashta in his Kitab al Masahif

 

Salim was among those who lost their lives in the battle of Yamama[99].

Other reports came forward with the straight forward assertion that the first to collect the Qur'an was Abu Bakr.[100] Employing popular beliefs among Muslims concerning 'Uthman's establishment of the standard Qur'an-including the role of Zayd b. Thabit as the project's main coordinator - the role of Abu Bakr in the collection of the Quran was then developed to what is seen in the above –cited account which, at the same time, reserves a major role for Umar as well, in the process.

 

[99] Ibn Abd al Barr, p 562

[100] Ibn Abi Shayba, vol 6 p 148, Ibn Abi Dawud, both quoting the report from Ali

 

 

To be completed...

[Gast Mustafa]

Asalamualaikum liebe Geschwister im Islam.

 

Das kann man natürlich noch reichlich ergänzen und garnieren, z.B. mit dem Schattenboxen zwischen answering-islam und einigen Sunniten und anderen; hier im Beispiel von Tabari bzgl. Jinn:

 

http://www.answering-islam.org/Quran/Contra/qi010a2.html

 

 

ABER

ich möchte in aller Bescheidenheit darauf hinweisen, daß die eingangs von mir beschriebene Problematik im Verständnis von verschiedenen Quranversen sehr wesentlich ist.

 

Um es klar zu sagen: Die eigentliche Gefahr liegt nicht darin, daß man in Beispielen darüber aufklärt, was alles an Mißverständnissen vorliegt,

sondern daß wir bei so wichtigen Problemen wie diesem vor einer List des Shaitan zurückweichen.

 

Shaitan ist es, der uns verunsichert offen über diese etwas komplizierten Sachverhalte zu diskutieren (und natürlich geht man womöglich davon aus, daß man nicht kompetent genug ist, es jedem verständlich zu machen).

Aber gerade in einem solchen Punkt, wie dem Streitpunkt über die sagenhaft sagenumwobene >un/vollständigkeit des Quran< trennt sich spreu von weizen, und Iblis schaut genüßlich drein, wie man ihm scharenweise auf den Leim geht.

 

Also (ich ignoriere gleich mal zu beginn solche "Exoten" wie die NUR QURAN und ihrem Ignorieren von jenen 2 Versen) -

beginnen wir doch mal ganz banal mit der Surat Fatiha.

 

Wie lautet der erste Vers ?

 

Schon hamm wir den Salat. (Nein nicht das Gebet)

 

Das erste Wort des ersten Verses der ersten Surat, jener Surat die in jedem Gebet vollständig rezitiert gehört - conditio sine qua non !

Und schon hat das absolute "kein Wort fehlt" ein Problem,

und jeder weiß das, aber wir sollen es ignorieren?

 

Ganz im Ernst und vor allem mit Blick auf jenes "absolutdenken" und "Vollständigkeit":

Das kann man keinem Vernunftbegabten Menschen vermitteln, daß sich über eine Milliarden Muslime nicht einig sind darüber, ob das Bismillah der erste Vers ist oder nicht, ob dies Bestandteil ist oder nicht.

 

Mit amin ist man sich allein deshalb einig, weil es erst wesentlich später eingeführt wurde und nie und nirgends als Bestandteil galt (...),

aber bei Bismillah,

bereits hier beginnt shaitan zu punkten gegenüber allen, die sich vehement auf jene persönlichen Interpretationen fixieren; der Begin von Fitna in diesem Punkt.

 

Und das lässt sich sehr facettenreich fortführen.

Ich z.B. versuche mich unentwegt auf La Yantiqu Anil Hawa zu konzentrieren.

 

Außerdem:

Wenn Quran 15:9 doch sowieso eine völlig andere Bedeutung hat – insbesondere anders als jenes, was viel zu regelmäßig als Grundlage zur Fitna herhalten muß,

wieso versucht man sich dennoch einem weitgehend unverständlichen und abwegigen Interpretations-Diktat des Shaitan zu beugen?

 

La Yantiqu Anil Hawa, meine Geschwister, und dennoch sind sich alle einig, dass über Muhammad mehr Lügen verbreitet wurden, "als Sand am Meer".

 

 

wasalam.

Mustafa

[Abdullah]

 

Das ganze wird dem Hinweis abgeschlossen, dass es noch sehr vieles zu berichten gebe, über das, was die Taqiyyah verbirgt...

 

Bitte erkläre was du unter Taqiya verstehst und zweite Frage:

 

Ist es möglich, dass GLEICHZEITIG ein GANZES Land oder eine GANZE Region Taqiya machen können?

 

Weiterhin gibt es einen Fall von Taqiya, der im Quran beschrieben ist.

 

[Gast abu dawud]

salam alaikum liebe geschwister im islam

ich möchte doch bitten das ihr die englischen texte doch entweder übersetzt, oder gleich in der übersetzung einstellt. denn es sind nicht alöle geschwister in der lage, texte in solcher länge auf englisch zu lesen.

ich danke euch

wa salam

[Abdullah]

 

ist nicht unser Thema hier, öffne einen neuen Thread, wenn es dich interessiert

 

 

Es gibt im übrigen auch bei den Schiiten Gelehrte, die extrem sind und an die Veränderung des Qurans glauben. In einem Threat in diesem Forum oder im alten ist eine Fatwa von Khamae'i, in der er eindeutig zu verstehen gegeben hat, dass der Glaube an die Veränderung des Qur'ans ein Irrweg darstellt!!!

 

Die schiitische Aqeed beinhaltet, dass der Quran, den wir heute vor uns haben, VOLLSTÄNDIG ist.

 

Die Reihenfolge in der der Quran zusammengestellt ist spiegelt NICHT die Reihenfolge des Herunterkommens wieder.

 

Es gibt zahlreiche Ayats, die sowohl zusammen gesehen werden müssen, als auch in mehreren Kontexten.

 

Daher frage ich dich, warum du dieTaqiyya in diesem Fall erwähnst und was du unter Taqiyya verstehst

 

Die Taqiyya ist auch im Quran vorhanden und wird dann angewendet, wenn das Leben oder der Isam in Gefahr ist.

Aber so wie du dieses hier angibst, denkst du, dass Taqiyya einfach eine Lüge ist.

So einfach ist das nicht.

 

[Abdullah]

 

Um genau zu sein, ist dies die Meinung aller klassischen Gelehrten der Schiiten - wie z.B. von Nuri Tabrassi bewiesen.

 

Frage mal Khamne'i oder Sistani wie ie dazustehen.

Es gibt einen Tahrif (Änderung des Qurans). Dieser bzieht sich nicht auf den TEXT des Quran sonder um deren DEUTUNG (Tafsier zw Twail)

 

Aha, aber kein Kuffr? Jemand, der davon schreibt, dass der Quraan lächerliche Verse enthalte, kann dennoch ein respektierter Gelehrter sein? Hat sich eben mal geirrt. Nicht weiter schlimm...

 

Wo habe ich gesagt, daß der Quran lächerliche Verse beinhatet?

Ich wollte das Wort Kuffr nicht verwenden, da es von einem ehemaligen Mitglied extensiv verwendet wurde. Dieser wurde auch weil er anderen Mitgliedern mit Mord drohte, des Forums verwiesen!!!

Kennst du die Dua, die viele sunnitische Imame am Freitagsgebet aufsagen?

 

...Alle Bida führt auf den Irrweg, jeder Irrweg führt ins Feuer!!

(Natürlich auf arabisch)

 

Von welcher Aqida sprichst du, wenn alle großen klassischen Gelehrten der Schiiten dem widersprachen und du selbst daran glaubst, dass die Reihenfolge der Verse manipuliert wurde?

 

Oben angedeutet!!

Es steht übrigens auch in RIAD SALIHIN.

Kennst du dieses nicht?

Das dumme ist nur, dass die Gelehrten zu dieser Zeit in der Umayyidischen bzw. Abbasidischen Dynastie lebten und NICHT alles sagen KONNTEN oder WOLLTEN!!!!

Nichts destotrotz waren immer Schiiten, die gegen das jeweilige System opponiert haben.