Question:

Does Al-Mufid confirm the removal and wrong order from the Qur’an?

Answer:

Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Al-Mufid writes:

أقول إن الأخبار قد جاءت مستفيضة عن أئمة الهدى من آل محمد صلى الله عليهم باختلاف القرآن وما أحدثه بعض الظالمين فيه من الحذف والنقصان فأما القول في التأليف فالموجود يقضي فيه بتقديم المتأخر وتأخير المتقدم ومن عرف الناسخ والمنسوخ والمكي والمدني لم يرتب بما ذكرناه

“I say that innumerable traditions were reported by the rightly guided imams from the family of Muhammad (s.) about differences in the Qur’an and what the tyrants did in it in terms of deletion and removal. About the compilation it has to be said that in the existing one the latter part is shifted forward and the former backward and as is known, the abolishing and abolished part and the Meccan and Medinan part we mentioned were not arranged in order.” [Awa’il-ul-Maqalat, pages 80-81]

واتفقت الإمامية على وجوب رجعة كثير من الأموات إلى الدنيا قبل يوم القيامة وإن كان بينهم معنى الرجعة اختلاف واتفقوا على إطلاق لفظ البداء في وصف الله تعالى وأن ذلك من جهة السمع دون القياس واتفقوا على أن أئمة الضلاة خالفوا في كثير من تأليف القرآن وعدلوا فيه من موجب التنزيل وسنة النبي صلى الله عليه وآله وأجمعت المعتزلة والخوارج والزيدية والمرجئة وأصحاب الحديث على خلاف الإمامية في جميع ما عددناه

“The followers of the Imams (a.) reached a consensus on the binding return to this world of many of the deceased and on the use of the term “appearance” (Bada’) with regard to the description of God and that it is done from the aspect of hearing without any comparison, and there is a consensus among them that the Imams have in large numbers opposed the misguidance in the compilation of the Qur’an and that in it they have deviated from the binding revelation and the custom of the Prophet (s. ) and the followers of the Mu’tazilah and Zaidites and Murji’ah and the traditionalists reached a consensus to oppose the followers of the Imams (a.) in everything we have listed.” [Awa’il-ul-Maqalat, page 46]

أهو ما بين الدفتين الذي في أيدي الناس أم هل ضاع مما أنزل الله تعالى على نبيه منه شئ أم لا؟ وهل هو ما جمعه أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام أم ما جمعه عثمان بن عفان على ما يذكره المخالفون؟ الجواب: لا شك أن الذي بين الدفتين من القرآن جميعه كلام الله تعالى وتنزيله وليس فيه شئ من كلام البشر وهو جمهور المنزل والباقي مما أنزله الله تعالى عند المستحفظ للشريعة المستودع للاحكام (المهدي) لم يضع منه شئ وإن كان الذي جمع ما بين الدفتين الان لم يجعله في جملة ما جمع لاسباب دعته إلى ذلك منها قصوره عن معرفة بعضه ومنها: شكه فيه وعدم تيقنه ومنها ما تعمد إخراجه منه. وقد جمع أمير الؤمنين عليه السلام القرآن المنزل من أوله إلى آخره وألفه بحسب ما وجب من تأليفه فقدم المكي على المدني, والمنسوخ على الناسخ ووضع كل شئ منه في محله فلذلك قاد جعفر بن محمد الصادق عليهما السلام: أما والله لوقرئ القرآن كما أنزل لالفيتمونا فيه مسمين كما سمي من كان قبلنا وقال عليه السلام: نزل القرآن آربعة أرباع: ربع فينا وبع في عدونا وربع سنن وأمثال وربع فرائض وأحكام, ولنا أهل البيت كرائم القران غير أن الخبر قد صح عن أئمتنا عليهم السلام أنهم أمروا بقراءة ما بين الدفتين, وأن لا يتعداه إلا زيادة فيه ولا نقصان منه حتى يقوم القائم عليه السلام فيقرأ للناس القرآن على ما أنزله الله تعالى وجمعه أمير المؤمنين عليه السلام وإنما نهونا عليهم السلام عن قراءة ما وردت به الاخبار من أحرف تزيد على الثابت في المصحف لانها لم تأت على التواتر, وإنما جاء بها الاحاد وقد يغلط الواحد فيما ينقله. ولانه متن قرأ الانسان بما خالف ما بين الدفتين غرر بنفسه وعرض نفسه للهلاك فنهونا عليهم السلام عن قراءة القرآن بخلاف ما ثبت بين الدفتين لما ذكرناه فإن قال قائل كيف يصح القول بأن الذي بين الدفتين هو كلام الله تعالى على الحقيقة من غير زيادة فيه ولا نقصان وأنتم تروون عن الائمة عليهم السلام أنهم قرأوا كنتم خير أئمة أخرجت للناس وكذلك جعلناكم أئمة وسطا وقرأوا يسالونك الانفال وهذا بخلاف ما في المصحف الذي في أيدي الناس قيل له قد مضى الجواب عن هذا وهو أن الاخبار التي جاءت بذلك اخبار آحاد لا يقطع على الله تعالى بصحتها فلذلك وقفنا فيها ولم نعدل عما في المصحف الظاهر على ما أمرنا به حسب ما بيناه مع أنه لا ينكر أن تاتي القراءة على وجهين منزلين أحدهما ما تضمنه المصحف والثاني ما جاء به الخبر كما يعترف مخالفونا به من نزول القرآن على أوجه شتى فمن ذلك قوله تعالى وما هو على الغيب بضنين  يريد ما هو ببخيل وبالقراءة الاخرى وما هو على الغيب بظنين يريد بمتهم ومثل قوله تعالى جنات تجري تحتها الانهار وعلى قراءة أخرى من تحتها الانهار ونحو قوله تعالى إن هذان لساحران وفي قراءة أخرى إن هذين لساحران وما أشبه ذلك بما يكثر تعداده, ويطول الجواب بإثباته وفيما ذكرناه كفاية إن شاء الله تعالى

“Is the Qur’an what is between the two covers of the book in the hands of the people or has something of what God revealed to His Prophet (s.) been lost or not? Is it what the Commander of the believers (a.) collected or what Uthman Ibn Affan collected, as the opponents say? The answer to this question is: There is no doubt that what is between the two covers of the Qur’an is altogether the Word of God and His revelation and there is nothing of the word of man in it and it is the majority of what was revealed and the remaining part is with the Guardian of the law and judgement (Mahdi) of which nothing was lost, even if it was the person who collected it, what is between the two covers of the book today, does not accomplish in the sum of what was to be collected and that for reasons that led them to do so, and among the reasons was that they had little knowledge of some of it and among the reasons was that they had doubts about it and were not convinced of it and among the reasons was that they deliberately removed it, whereby the commander of the believers (a.) had already collected the revealed Qur’an from the beginning to the end and put it together as it should be so that he placed the Meccan one before the Medinan one and the revealed one before the receiving one and he put all of it in its place and therefore Ja’far As-Sadiq (a.) said: “By God, if one would read the Qur’an as it was revealed, you would have come across us in it with our names as it was named for him who was before us.” He also said: “The Qur’an was sent down in four quarters. One quarter about us, one quarter about our enemy, one quarter about customs and parables and one quarter about duties and judgments and for us the people of the house are the honours of the Qur’an.” Even if the report of our Imams (a.) is authentic (Sahih), that they ordered to read what is between the two covers of the book and not to go beyond it, neither by adding to it nor by removing it until the one who rises (Qa’im) appears, so that he reads the Qur’an to the people as God revealed to him and the commander of the believers (a.) collected and they only forbade us to read what the traditions reported in terms of wordings that go beyond what is confirmed in the codex (Mushaf) because they do not reach the consecutive degree (Tawatur) and only individual reports (Ahad) were received about them and one can make a mistake with what he has transmitted and because there is a content, that the human being does not read like what is between the two book covers, whereby he might put himself in danger and expose himself to destruction, and because of what we mentioned, they forbade us to read the Qur’an with what is different from what is confirmed between the two book covers, but should someone ask: “How is it correct to say that what is between the two covers is actually the Word of God, without addition in it and without removal from it, while you are told by the Imams (a. ) that they read: “You were the best Imams ever brought forth for mankind.” (3:110) And: “Thus We made you imams of the middle.” And that they read: “They ask of you the spoils obtained without battle.” (8:1) Whereas this is different from the codex (Mushaf) which is in the hands of men?” Then they tell him: “The answer to this has already been given, and that is that these are traditions that came in through individual reports (Ahad) which do not give any unquestionable certainty before God as to their correctness, and that is why we stopped about them and did not turn away from what is written in the obvious codex (Mushaf) because of what we were ordered to do as clearly stated, even if it is not to be rejected (Munkar) that a reading is done in two ways: One of them is the one that contains the codex (Mushaf) and the other one is the one that the narration has transmitted and our opponents recognize many different ways of the revelation of the Qur’an, among which is the verse: “He is not abstinent in regard to what is hidden.” (81:24) By which is meant: “He is not stingy about that.” Another reading is: “He is not suspicious of that which is hidden.” By which is meant: “he is not to be accused.” As well as the verse: “Gardens beneath which rivers flow.” (9:100) Another reading is: “From beneath which rivers flow.” As well as the verse: “These two are two sorcerers.” (20:63) Another reading is “Those two are two sorcerers.” As well as that which is similar and numerous in its listing and the answer by the proof of that and what we mentioned in the way, God willing, will be longer.” [Al-Masa’il-us-Sarawiyyah, pages 78-85]

 

Comment:

What is disputed is the notion of the removed part of the Qur’an: “Should it be called an explanation (tafsir) or a verse (ayah)?” The fact is that both parties agree on the occurrence of the removal and where does it make a big difference whether one gives the removed part this or that term if the title describes one and the same occurrence? If one can remove the explanation (Tafsir), why not the text, and if one can remove the text, why not the explanation (Tafsir)?