Shia view of the Quran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Shī‘ah view of the Qur'an (known in English as "The Koran") has some differences from the Sunni view, but the text of the Qur'an is exactly identical. While there is a belief that the Shī‘ah disputed the canonical validity of the Uthmanic codex,[1] there are studies that show the Shī‘ah Imams always rejected the idea of alteration of Qur'an's text.[2] Since the 10th century, only a total of seven Shī‘ah scholars believed in omissions in the Uthmanic codex.[2]

History[edit]

The Shī‘ah use the same Qur'an as Sunni Muslims, however they do not believe that it was first compiled by Uthman ibn Affan.[3] The Shī‘ah believe that the Qur'an was gathered and compiled by Muhammad during his lifetime.[4][5][6] This completed version of the Qur'an was kept next to the pulpit of Muhammad within the Mosque of Madinah, where scholars would come to transcribe more copies.[3] Furthermore, Grand Ayatollah Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei believed that Ali possessed a Quran of his own, which included the divinely revealed commentary of the Quran.[7]

According to orientalist professor Etan Kohlberg, Twelver Shia believed in the distortion of the Quran up to the era of the Buyids,[8] and this belief was common among Shia during the early Islamic centuries.[9] Among other reasons, the distortion was alleged to have been carried out to remove any references to the rights of Ali and the Imams,[10] the approval of their supporters and the disapproval of their enemies, such as specific Umayyads and Abbasids.[11] According to William St. Clair Tisdall, if such content had existed in the Quran then "Of course the Sunnite Khalifahs had very great reason to endeavour to suppress any such passages".[12]

Since at least the 10th century, Sunnis have incessantly attacked Shia for their perceived espousal of Quranic distortion and regard it as one of the most blatant examples of Shia "heresy".[13] When 11th century Muslim scholar Ibn Hazm argued the Muslim claim that the gospels had been corrupted, one Christian counter-argument was "that the Rawafid maintain that the Companions of your Prophet altered the Koran by way of omissions and additions." This accusation of tabdil (alteration)—a result of Shi'ite distrust towards the companions—was scathingly refuted by Ibn Hazm.[14]

The mainstream Shia view[edit]

Grand Ayatollah Abu al-Qasim al-Khoei (d. 1992), who was considered "the most prominent Shiite cleric in Iraq after 1970 and most followed globally",[15] resumes the situation:

The accepted view among Muslims is that no alteration has occurred in the Qur'an, and that the text that is in our hands is the whole Qur'an that was revealed to the great Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny). A large number of prominent scholars have proclaimed this. Among them is the leading traditionist (muhaddith) Muhammad b. Babawayh. He has counted the belief in nonalteration of the Qur'an among the doctrines of the Imamite (Twelver) Shi'ites. The jurist-doctor of the Imamite Shi'ite community, Abu Ja'far Muhammad b. al-Hasan al-Tusi, is another major figure who holds this view. He puts forth this view at the beginning of his exegesis of the Qur'an, entitled al-Tibyan, and has also cited the opinion, to that effect, of his teacher, al-Sharif al-Murtada, supporting it with the most complete evidence. The famous exegete al-Tabarsi has also asserted this doctrine, in the introduction to his commentary, Majma' al-Baydn. Among the leading jurists, this view is declared by Shaykh Ja'far Kashif al-Ghita' in the section of his juridical work, Kashf al-Ghita', that deals with the Qur'an; in that section, he asserts that there is a consensus on the issue. The most learned jurist, al-Shahshahani, in his discussion on the Qur'an in the work entitled al-'Urwa al-Wuthqa, maintains the same opinion and ascribes the doctrine of nonalteration to the majority of jurists. Other scholars who uphold this view include the famous traditionist, al-Mawla Muhsin al-Qasani [al-Kashi], and the leading teacher al-Shaykh Muhammad Jawad al-Balaghi.

A group of scholars has ascribed the doctrine of nonalteration to a large number of the most eminent among them. These include al-Shaykh al-Mufid, al-Shaykh al-Baha'i, al-Qadi Nur Allah al-Shustari, and others as prominent. On the other hand, those who hold this view implicitly include Shi'ite scholars who have written about the necessity of the Imamate and have mentioned the shortcomings without dealing with the question of alteration. Had these scholars believed that alterations had been made in the Qur'an, this would have been more worthy of mention than the burning of [the unofficial] codices and other such accounts.

In short, the common view among Shi'ite scholars and researchers, or, rather, what is unanimously agreed upon by them, is the view that no alteration has been made to the Qur'an. However, a faction of Shi'ite traditionists and a group of Sunni scholars have held the view that alterations were made. According to al-Rafi'i, "A group of scholastic theologians (ahl al-kalam)—who have no preoccupation except to engage in conjecture and allegorical interpretation (ta'wil), and to seek procedures of disputation in every injunction and doctrine—maintain the possibility that some passages of the Qur'an may be missing. They attribute this to the way it was collected." Al-Tabarsi, in his Majma 'al-Bayan, ascribes this view to the Hashwiyya group among the Sunnis.[16]

Shia scholars who supported Qur'anic distortion[edit]

Some Shia scholars who supported the view that the Qur'anic text had been distorted were:

Many other Shia scholars have held ambiguous attitudes towards corruption of the Quran, such as Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (d. 1698), Mulla Ahmad Naraqi (d. 1829), Morteza Ansari (d. 1864), Mohammad-Kazem Khorasani (d. 1911) and Ruhollah Khomeini (d. 1989).[22]

Tafsīr[edit]

The Shī‘ah tafsīr on several verses are different from the traditional Sunni view either through a totally different interpretation or by giving the same interpretation, but giving that interpretation a larger impact on their jurisprudence. Shia also tend to interpret the Quran more allegorically (Batin) and less literally than Sunnis.[23] For example, Shia writers, including Ali Ibn Ibrahim Qomi, usually allegorically interpret the term Bani Isra'il (sons/tribe of Israel) as a code word for the Ahlul Bayt.[24]

33:33[edit]

Hadith of The Cloak

4:24[edit]

4:24, or an-Nisa, 24, also called as "the verse of Mut‘ah", is the Qur'anic verse that some Shī'ites use to prove the legality of temporary marriages (Arabic: Nikah Mut'ah‎‎).

5:55[edit]

wali

Misconceptions[edit]

There are some common disputed misconceptions and accusations about the Shī‘ah regarding their beliefs.

While Sunnis and the Shī‘ah accept the same text of the Qur'an, some, such as Muhibb-ud-Deen Al-Khatib,[25] claim that Shī‘ah dispute the current version, including that they add two additional sūratayn, an-Nūrayn and al-Wilāya.[26] This accusation of tahrīf "tampering" is antithetical to scholars and is considered polemical.[27][28] The above sūratayn are considered forgeries and do not appear in published Qur'ans.

Shī‘ah Muslims consider the accusation that they are using a different Qur'an as one of the misconceptions about the Shi'a. The Shī‘ah recite the Qur'an according to the Qira’t of Hafs on authority of ‘Asim, which is the prevalent Qira’t in the Islamic world.[29]

The issue of Tahreef [tampering] has been a matter of disagreement between many classical Shia scholars. It has been mentioned that the likes of Muhammad Baqir Majlisi (author of Bihar al-Anwar), Muhammad ibn Ya'qub al-Kulayni (author of Kitab al-Kafi), Ni'matullah Al Jazaa'iri (author of Anwar Al Nu'maniyyah, d. 1701[30]) and Al Ayyaashi (author of Tafsir Ayyashi) among others were of the view that the present Qur'an is not the same as was revealed to Muhammad ibn Abdullah and omission/corruption has taken place. Overall, it is claimed that the Shia have more than 1,000 hadiths ascribed to the Shia Imams which indicate the distortion of the Quran.[31]

According to Muhammad Baqir Majlisi, the difference of opinion among the scholars and jurists was as follows:

No one from the people claimed…’: meaning, those other than the Imāms (as). What is meant by ‘the entire Qur’ān’ is all its words and letters, and what is meant by ‘as it was revealed’ is its arrangement, declensions, vowellike and vowelless diacritics, and the length of verses and chapters.

This is a refutation of the faction that claims that the Qur’ān is what is in the known copies and as read by the reciters of the seven variant readings and their likes.

Our associates differed concerning that; al-Şadūq ibn Bābawayh and a group opined that the Qur’ān did not alter from how it was revealed and nothing was deleted from it, while al-Kulaynī and al-Shaykh al-Mufīd—may Allāh sanctify both of their souls!—and a group opined that the whole Qur’ān is with the Imāms and what is in the copies is some of it. And the Commander of the Believers [`Alī] (as) compiled it as it was revealed after the Messenger, and went out to the hypocritical Companions, but they did not accept it from him and rather approached its compilation during the reigns of `Umar and `Uthmān, as it will soon be detailed in Kitāb al-Qur’ān.[32]

Some accused Shī‘ah of alleging that Fatimah had her own Mus'haf (Qur'an), the Mushaf of Fatimah, which was allegedly three times larger than the current Qur'an. Again, Shī‘ahs reject this as a misrepresentation of facts aimed at discrediting them. According to Momen Shiite Imams had certain books (including of Fatimah (Mashafe Fatimah) a book revealed by Gabriel to Fatimah to console her on the death of her father) in their possession, none of them were Quran.[33]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ "Shīʿism and the Qurʾān". Encyclopaedia of the Qur'an. Leiden: Brill Publishers. 2004. 
  2. ^ a b Modarressi, Hossein (1993). "Early Debates on the Integrity of the Qur'ān: A Brief Survey". Studia Islamica (77): 5–39. doi:10.2307/1595789. JSTOR 1595789. 
  3. ^ a b Shirazi, Muhammad (2004). The Qur'an made simple. 10. London,UK: Fountain Books. pp. xxiv. 
  4. ^ Shirazi, Muhammad (2001). The Qur'an - When was it compiled?. London,UK: Fountain Books. pp. 5, 7. 
  5. ^ Shirazi, Muhammad (2004). The Qur'an made simple. 10. London,UK: Fountain Books. pp. xxi, xxiv, xxv. 
  6. ^ Shirazi, Muhammad (2008). The Shi'a and their Beliefs. London,UK: Fountain Books. p. 29. 
  7. ^ Brunner, Rainer; Ende, Werner, eds. (1 Jan 2001). The Twelver Shia in Modern Times: Religious Culture and Political History (illustrated ed.). BRILL. p. 187. ISBN 9789004118034. 
  8. ^ REZAEE HAFTADOR HASAN; SARVI FATEMEH (2013). "CRITICISM OF ETHAN KOHLBERG'S VIEW ON THE DISTORTION OF THE QURAN". IRANIAN JOURNAL FOR THE QURANIC SCIENCES & TRADITION. 46 (1): 73–87. 
  9. ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari (2009). Kohlberg, Etan; Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali, eds. "Revelation and Falsification: The Kitab al-qira'at of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyari: Critical Edition with an Introduction and Notes by Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi" (PDF). Texts and studies on the Qurʼān. BRILL. 4: 7 (Preface and Acknowledgements). ISSN 1567-2808. 
  10. ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari (2009). Kohlberg, Etan; Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali, eds. "Revelation and Falsification: The Kitab al-qira'at of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyari: Critical Edition with an Introduction and Notes by Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi" (PDF). Texts and studies on the Qurʼān. BRILL. 4: 7 (Preface and Acknowledgements). ISSN 1567-2808. 
  11. ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari (2009). Kohlberg, Etan; Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali, eds. "Revelation and Falsification: The Kitab al-qira'at of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyari: Critical Edition with an Introduction and Notes by Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi" (PDF). Texts and studies on the Qurʼān. BRILL. 4: 20, 24. ISSN 1567-2808. 
  12. ^ William St. Clair Tisdall (1913). Zwemer, Samuel Marinus, ed. "Shi'ah Additions To The Koran" (PDF). The Moslem World. 3 (3): 229. 
  13. ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari (2009). Kohlberg, Etan; Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali, eds. "Revelation and Falsification: The Kitab al-qira'at of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyari: Critical Edition with an Introduction and Notes by Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi" (PDF). Texts and studies on the Qurʼān. BRILL. 4: 24. ISSN 1567-2808. 
  14. ^ Israel Friedlaender (1908). "The Heterodoxies of the Shiites in the Presentation of Ibn Hazm" (PDF). Journal of the American Oriental Society. American Oriental Society. 29: 61–2. Retrieved 11 April 2015. As for their argument regarding the Rawafid and their contention that the Koran readings were interpolated, the Rawafid do not belong to the Muslims. They consist of a number of sects, the first of which arose twenty-five years after the Prophet's death. It was originally the response of some people abandoned by Allah to the call of those who beguiled Islam, a party which followed the course of the Jews and Christians as regards falsehood and heresy. They are divided into various sections. The most extravagant of them assume the divinity of Ali b. Abi Talib and of a number of people besides him. The least extravagant of them believe that the sun was twice turned backwards for Ali.' How can one be indignant over lies coming from people whose lowest rank in lying is such (as described)?" He then proceeds elaborately to refute this charge. He cleverly beats the Rawafid with their own weapons by pointing to the fact that Ali himself, "who according to most of them is a god, a creator, and, according to some of them, a prophet endowed with speech, while in the opinion of the rest he is an infallible Imam, the obedience to whom is a religious command imposed by Law," did not object to the Koran in its present shape and, while Caliph, did not fight the interpolators, which would have been his sacred duty. "Thus the mendacity of the Rawafid becomes evident, and praise be unto Allah, the Lord of (all) Created Beings!" A brief reference to the same subject is contained Ed. IV, 14615: "unless the Rawafid fall back on ignoring the Koran and (assuming) omissions and additions in it. This is something whereby becomes evident their impudence, ignorance and stupidity. 
  15. ^ David Siddhartha Patel, Islam, information, and social order: the strategic role of religion in Muslim societies, Stanford University (2007), p. 63
  16. ^ Al-Sayyid Abu al-Qasim al-Musawi al-Khu'i, Prolegomena to the Qur'an, Oxford University Press (1998), pp. 137-138
  17. ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari (2009). Kohlberg, Etan; Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali, eds. "Revelation and Falsification: The Kitab al-qira'at of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyari: Critical Edition with an Introduction and Notes by Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi" (PDF). Texts and studies on the Qurʼān. BRILL. 4: 7 (Preface and Acknowledgements). ISSN 1567-2808. 
  18. ^ a b Abdolkarim Soroush (2009). The Expansion of Prophetic Experience: Essays on Historicity, Contingency and Plurality in Religion. BRILL. p. 145. ISBN 9789047424369. 
  19. ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari (2009). Kohlberg, Etan; Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali, eds. "Revelation and Falsification: The Kitab al-qira'at of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyari: Critical Edition with an Introduction and Notes by Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi" (PDF). Texts and studies on the Qurʼān. BRILL. 4: 27. ISSN 1567-2808. 
  20. ^ Robert Gleave (2000). Inevitable Doubt: Two Theories of Shīʻī Jurisprudence. BRILL. pp. 64–5. ISBN 9789004115958. 
  21. ^ Rainer Brünner (2004). Islamic Ecumenism In The 20th Century: The Azhar And Shiism Between Rapprochement And Restraint (revised ed.). BRILL. p. 336. ISBN 9789004125483. The Sunni reproach that the Shiites believe in another, i.e. falsified, Koran was already encountered in the heresiographic literature of the twentieth century and was emphatically denied by the Shia, whereas the Shiite defenders of a tahrif theory such as al-Tabrisi or his student Agha Bozorg al-Tehrani always remained in the minority. 
  22. ^ Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Sayyari (2009). Kohlberg, Etan; Amir-Moezzi, Mohammad Ali, eds. "Revelation and Falsification: The Kitab al-qira'at of Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Sayyari: Critical Edition with an Introduction and Notes by Etan Kohlberg and Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi" (PDF). Texts and studies on the Qurʼān. BRILL. 4: 28–9. ISSN 1567-2808. 
  23. ^ Diane Morgan (2010). Essential Islam: A Comprehensive Guide to Belief and Practice. ABC-CLIO. p. 34. ISBN 9780313360251. 
  24. ^ David Cook (2008). Contemporary Muslim Apocalyptic Literature (reprint ed.). Syracuse University Press. pp. 103–5. ISBN 9780815631958. 
  25. ^ Hassan Rezaee Haftador; Fath Allah NajarZadegan (July 2013). "An Investigation into the Earliest Historical Evidence on the Alleged Shia Forgery of Surahs Nurayn and Wilayat". European Journal of Scientific Research. 106 (2): 230. ISSN 1450-216X. Another consequence of this false allegation against the Shia is that some radical Salafis, such as Muhibb al-Din al-Khatib, contend that Shias have two Qur’ans: there is the standard Qur’an, which they pretend to venerate so as to be accepted by other Muslims, and there is the peculiar Shia version of the Qur’an, which contains the false chapter regarding the virtues of Ali and which they hide from other Muslims (al-Khatib, 1999). 
  26. ^ The Shi'i Qur'an: an Examination of Western Scholarship by Jonah Winters
  27. ^ Tahríf refers to tampering with the letters or words of the verses of the Holy Qur'án, changing them from the original revealed form
  28. ^ Tahrif al-Qur'an
  29. ^ Is the Qur’an Corrupted? Shi’ites’ View
  30. ^ Sajjad H. Rizvi (2010). "Sayyid Niʿmat Allāh al-Jazāʾirī and his Anthologies: Anti-Sufism, Shiʿism and Jokes in the Safavid World". Die Welt des Islams. BRILL. 50: 224–242. doi:10.1163/157006010x514497. Retrieved 5 April 2015. 
  31. ^ HADDADIAN ABDORREZA; MOADDAB SEYYED REZA. "A STUDY ON TRADITIONS OF DISTORTION IN AYYASHI EXEGESIS". HADITH STUDIES. 4 (8): 141–166. 
  32. ^ Muhammad Baqir al Majlisi, The Mirror of Intellects (Arabic: Mir'at ul-Oqool View)
  33. ^ Momen, Moojan (1985). An Introduction to Shi'i Islam. Yale University Press. pp. 39, 183. ISBN 978-0-300-03531-5.