Translation of this page and for a more complete translation of this page and athers together click on this link : https://www.kalemasawaa.com/vb/t4717.html
Answering those who ask''Did abdoul Malik bin Marwan change the some
verses in the quran ?
Zohri said he heard ( again i repeat ) ---- he heard ---- that the prophet Mohamad(pbuh),AbuBakkir,
Omar,Othman,Mua'waia and his son Yazeed used to read the word '' Malik'' in verse (3) Chaper(1)
and al Zohri Said '' first one who read it as ''Mlik yom eddeen'' was Bin Marwan.
Answer:
1- I think that its enough of a proof that when Zohri said '' I heard'' that /so and so , that a wize
person wont take his slopy handelling of something important as truth .
2-Ibin Kathir said in respons to Zohri : IBin Marwan is right when he read it '' Mlik'' and that Zohri
had NO chain of narraition .
The qustion is what is the proof of what ibin kathir said ??
3-Umm Salamah said that she used to hear the prophet (pbuh) read :
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful. 2 Praise be to God, the Cherisher and
Sustainer of the Worlds; 3 Most Gracious, Most Merciful; 4 Master(Mlik) of the Day of
Judgment.(1:2-4)Quran, Each verse on its own ,one by one..
She also said: the prophet (pbuh) used to Read every verse on it own , one by one, and said:
Most Gracious, Most Merciful. THEN STOP 2 Praise be to God, the Cherisher and
Sustainer of the Worlds; THEN STOP 3 Most Gracious, Most Merciful; 4 Master(Mlik) of
the Day of Judgment.(1:2-4)Quran
4-The Othmani Mushaf (writing) of the quran had it as (Mlik) without the (a) and in this writing you can
read both (MALIK) and (Mlik)
Answering who says '' the Hajjaj changed atleast 10 words in the holy
quran, andthe Sijistany wrote a book call '' what the Hajjaj changed from
the Mushaf of Othman''
1-A Sain Proof : How can the Hajjaj change these words without any one of the people who
memorize the quran saying anything too him??
or do christians what us to believe that no one memorized the quran at the time of Hajjaj .
2- The Passed down proof: the story of the vaouls and ,Or dots that the christians told, is not
like what the christians like to present it ,(( like what was said in -Mathahil Alarifeen-(imressive
of the knowlage) the first part of page280 to281))
The Zarqani said: what is known to us is that the Othmanic text of the quran was NOT doted and
without voules ...and the whether this or that, the quran did Not get voules Or doted until the time
of Abdul Malik Bin Marwan . And that Abdul allah bin marwan (the Hajjaj) commaded that he
would be obayed for this cause,and so he sent two people for the cause.
1-Nasir bin assim allithy
2-yahya bin ya'amor aladawani
And both are students of Abo alaswad Al-Doa'li
And the Qustion again is; '' is this the quran the first to be vouled and Doted ????
We say NO the quran was Doted and vouled by Abo alaswad Al-Doa'li and IBin Sirean
had a vouled and doted quran of their own, but that they only had for himself not
for all the people.
And here is the whole story about the lie that was told by the christians that the Hajjaj
changed some of the quran:
Abbad bin Sohaib Said that ; Awef bin abi jamilah said'' the Hajjaj bin yousif changed 11 letters
of the Othmanic Text of the quran, Example he said it was in (2:259) {lam yatasana } and he
added an {h} so it became {lam yatasanah} ; and also Al-Ma'ddah {sharia'tan wa minhaja} he
made it {shira'tan} and so on....ext
-qouted from the book of Sijistani {Al mushaf}
Here is what these rightous people said about Abbad Bin Sohaib.
1-Ali Bin Almadani said : His Speach is Falus
2-Albokhari: Not to even take into considiration
3-Altirmizi:Not to even take into considiration (to leave it)
4-Ibin Habban: he sometimes narrarates things that a bigner would know is to be (its falus)
5-Al zahabi Said: (to be left out)
And how is this posible that a historian mentions something like this without going back to
the schoalers to see if its true or not before delievering it to the people, when at his time
(the Hajjaj) their was no one critisizing this? Or even after his death ? and was this posible when
a lot of muslims memorized quran word for word, and even if we say that no one memorized it,
was'nt their any quran hidden from the Hajjaj ? so hajjaj was able to do this without even any
muslim memorization or Mushaf (text) being presived ?
And by the way the Sijistani did Not write a book called '' what was chaged by Hajjaj of the
Mushaf '' But rather its called '' What Hajjaj wrote in the Mushaf ''
Answering those who say that their is two chapters (sorah's) Added in the
qurantext of Aobi Bin kaib:
The uneducated Christians said:
1-Its reported that Al-A'mash said :about the recitation of Aobi Bin Kaib '' Allahoma ina
nasta'inok wa nastagfirok, wa nothni alika wala nakforok....ext '' and '' Allahoma
ina iyaka nabod, wa laka nosali wa nasjod....& so on''
2- Ibin Sirean Said : Aobay bin Kaib wrote in this own copy of the mushaf ( quranic text) the Faiha
(chapter 1) , Al-Falaq(chapter 113) Al-Nass(chapter 114) and the two chapters (Allahoma ina
nasta'inok) &(Allahoma ina iyaka Nabod) And the Ibin Masoud left them, And Othman
Only wrote (chapter 1-113-114) and Aobi Bin Kaib Also used to make suplication
(qonoot) with those two chapters and write them in his (quranic text) or his Mushaf.
3-Abdul Rahman Bin ibza is reported to have said : in the Mushaf of ibin Abbas, the
reading of Aobi bin Kaib and Abo Musa : ' Allahoma ina nasta'inok wa nastagfirok,
wa nothni alika wala nakforok....ext '' and '' Allahomaina iyaka nabod, wa laka
nosali wa nasjod....& so on'' -sublication from the quran-
4-Also what is reported about some of the prophets companians that used to make qunoot in
(suplication) their prayer with those two verses after the death of the prophet:
Omar ibin al Kattab (my god be pleased with him) used to also make (qunoot) with these two
(chapters of the quran)'' al hafd and the other one al khalia'a ...''
To answer these people Who bring these reportings to us and say that
the quran is missing these two (chapters).
1-I Challange any genous christian to come and give me a (caticorized -True-) haidth or
narraration.
The first narraration was from the book called '' Al athar libin Alatheer''and its caticorized
umongest the stangers of the hadith.
and off course the poor christians go anywhere to get a hadith, without hadith knowlage,
and illiterate of hadith science.
2-Is the (Qunoot) sublication done in prayer by reading quran ?
3-some of the compaians useto write in their own copy of the quran, interputation (of the
quran) suplication that the prophet used to suplicat with during prayer, because all these
things they put in the quran does not disterb their knowlage of what is quran and what is
just Notes of interputation and such.
4-these to chapters were two verses of supliction in the quran (similar to the fatiha) that
was brought down from god , later Abrogated But still allowed to use as SUPLICATION
Only, and aslo people mixed them with suplication of their own, and thats why Aobi left
these suplication verses as SIDE NOTES SUPLICATION , AS THE QURAN NOW A
DAY you can find suplications at the end of it NOT FROM THE QURAN
5-Nafia'a reported ( he is one of the narrarators of the diffrent -qira'at- recitation's) the
recitation of Aobi ibin kaib that the prophet tought him , and it was also reported by ibin
katheer , Abo Omaro , and others ... And NONE of these reports had the two chapters
that were once part of the quran before they were ABROGATED (Alhfid & Al-Khalia'a)
6-And Aobi had the same exact quran as the quran we have in our hand today.
one last proof: Abo Alhassan Alashari said '' I saw the mushaf of Aobi Bin Kaib in
Al-Basrra (in iraq) at a son of his , and i found it to be an exact match as the one that
he had with him.
Answering those who lie by saying ibin masoud didnt add the last two
chapters of the quran 113-114
This falty claim has been expressed, in the past by some christians and some
misguided people of those of claim they are (quranics) and they answer them self
with their clear contridictional critisizam.
The hadith used for this is from Albokhari :
Reported by Zar bin hobaish , he said : I asked Aobi bin Kaib and said ''O son of Monzir
you brother Ibin Masoud is saying , such & such .
Aobi replyed i asked the prophet he said to me : he told me and i said .
So we say what the prophet (pbuh) said ...End of hadith
First qurstion that comes to mind is ; where was the criticism to Ibin Masoud in this hadith??
The hadith was a -mubham- (unclear) as the schoalers said !!!!
And here is the comentary by AL-hafiz bin Hajar, in a book called (Alfatih)
He Said ; the hadith was -mubham- (a schoalerly term for UNCLEAR) , and i thought that Albokhari
spoke of it -mubham- but when i went back to the Narrarator (AL Ismaili) i found that he
too has it -Unclear -
* And the christians think they have it made for them since it was -Clear- in the narraration of imam
Ahmad where he said { your brother (Ibin masoud) dont write the two chapters (113-114) in his
-Mushaf - }
* And also in another nerraration {Ibin Masoud used to Not write (113-114) in his copy and used to
say that they are Not from the book of allah }
So we conclude atleast that the christians agree with us on whats known as(( Gathering of Hadith
routes))
Because the hadith of BoKhari, is translated by them from the Hadith of Imam Ahmad and
they make his hadith undoubtably a means of interputing of Bokharis Hadith!
and if we agree on this with the christians, that the quran and hadith translates each other and is
tied together, i give you and example: when you tell the christians about the hadith of the prophet
(pbuh) where he tells Quraish { I came to you with slaughter ) < this hadith is in Imam Ahmads
collection , But it has a detailed translation in Bokhary, Christians are quick to say Never minde
any other hadith '' we take every hadith alone'' christians say.
NOW , since they are gathering hadith routes to prove their case with what they call
''good arguments'' , We reply with allahs will , and this reply with One hadith for sure will bash
their so called arguments about this matter.
And this hadith is ALSO in the collection of Iman Ahmad Hadith's, In it its reported that Zar Bin
Hobaish Said: I said to Aobi Bin Kaib that Ibin Masoud did'nt write chapters(113-114) in his copy
of the quran, Then he said i bare witness that the prophet of allah (pbuh) told me that jibreal (pbuh)
said to him {113.001 Say: I seek refuge with the Lord of the Dawn }and the he said: say
{114.001 Say: I seek refuge with the Lord and Cherisher of Mankind}then he said it, and
so we say what the prophet said..>>BUT dont be to happy Mr christian Because this hadith still
dont comfirm you position , if thats what your thinking<<<
Because the Tabari in the book called '' Al-Awosat'' said : that Ibin Masoud said like Aobi said.
about them being tought this from the prophet(pbuh)
And before i move on, i will say that any hadith about this matter Told By Zar about Aobi Bin Kaib
is a transmition of thoughts expressed by Zar,and is what schoalers call {inbalanced transmition}
NOT in {transmitors OR nerrarators} So in other words their is No Hadith that says '' reported by
Zar, that Ibin masoud said: chapter (113-114) Is Not from the quran .
But on the other hand we do have a hadith thats clear about Ibin masouds position on the
Two chapters .
Sofyan Ibin Oyayna reported ,that Obida and Assim reported , that Zar Said ; i said to Aobi , your
brother does not say that (113-114) are from the quran, Ibin Masoud did'nt Coment on that, but he
when on to say , YES ;and they are not in mushaf of Ibin Masoud , because he used to hear the
prophet recite them to Hassan and Hossain , But never heard him recite them in prayer , so he
''THOUGHT'' that their not from the quran ,While other compaians heard the prophet recite them,
then they let ibin masoud know .
So he did'nt deniy that they are from the quran like some christians like or hope it to be, he
(( thought )) that because he never heard the prophet read them in his prayer, where IN PRAYER.
and i will explain this in a little while.
so again these Hadith that are Narrarated about the two chapters are only conclusions by Zar not
basied on hearing accounts , AND ;
1- AL Nawawi ,in the book (sharh al mazhab)
2-Ibin hizam ,in (al mahly)
3-fakhir al Razy , In( Awaal tafseerh)
4-Albaqalani
All agree that any Hadith for -Mosnad- Imam Ahmad is {inbalanced transmition} again { Not an
inbalance of Narrarator} '' arabic schoaler term ( shaz fee al matin) , and that happens when there
a hadith is narrarated throu few people, Not hundreds , with would make it a balanced narraration)
{and god know best- i hope i got the right term for (shaz) in the english }
Back to our topic , and to give you a proof ;
1-of the ten diffrent recitations of the quran (Al qira'at al Al ashir)(dialex) is whats is passed down
from Abdoullah bin Masoud to the following people , with NO deniy of the two chapters as being
part of the quran , and they are:
1-Abi Amer Albasri
2-Assim bin Abi Al Nojod
3-ALI bin Hamza Al ksaa'i
4- Yaqoob Bin Ishaq Alhadrami
5-Khaf bin hisham Al bazar
And again None of these people deniy that chapter (113-114) is not from the quran, being the
students of IBin Masoud and transmiting the recitations of ibin masoud , to what we have today,
and whats known as the (7 ahroof) narrarated by (ten reciters
2- Ibin masoud did NOT memorize the quran fully , and it was said that he did after the prophet
Mohammads death , and it was also said that he never memorized it fully ,this was metioned by
(( Al qahtani)), Al though some people might get confused because the prophet told the people to
learn the quran from ibin masound As it states in Bkohari, But it don't mean that he memorized it,
the prophet (pbuh) was refuring to his knowlage of (Translation & recitation ) (Tafseer & Qirah) and
even ibin masoud say this same thing about him self >> their is No one that i know of , that has
more knowlage of where the verses came down and about who the veses where talking about<<
Stated in Bkhari .
3- So ibin Masoud was A better reciter then Zaid bin Thabit, But No a ''HAFIZ'' memorizer of the
quran like zaid was, and if ibin masoud took ((70)) chapters from the prophet Directly , then let it
be know that Zaid took the hole quran from the prophet peace be upon him , and i will talk about
this more Extensivly as we progress God willing.
4-the Mushaf or copy of the quran was his own copy and he used to write in it Only what he hears
from the prophet in Prayer , My proof is from the prayer of the prophet :
A- the chapters in ibin masoud's copy goes as follows (Al-baqara/Al-Nisa/ALi-Imran) and thats
because the prophet used to read in this order in the optional nightly prayer .
B-Ibin masoud did'nt used to write the (Fatiha) In his copy of the quran is another proof , because
when he was asked about this he said; IF i wanted to write it i would have wrote it at the bigging
of each sorrah,( and when do the muslims read the Fatiha in payer???? Answer ; A must read in
every prayer , and even if every section or( rokaa) of prayer)
And because ibin masoud will hear (AL Fatiha ) meny times in the one day (in the outload prayer,
like FAJIR prayer and Magrib prayer and Ishaa Prayer)
C- With him not writing the Fatiha (chapter 1) although he knows its from the quran Can only mean
that the copy he had was only writen by him for him.
6- We dont have a clear hadith stating that Ibin Maoud said : I don't agree that the quran should'nt
have the to chapters (113-114)
7-And why do we NOT hear that any one of the big compaians like ALI and Mouawia...spread this
some kind of critisizim agains Othman Or Zaid (may god be pleased with them all) ???
As for the people that went as far as calling these Hadith about Ibin masod as
(True in Context) or whats known as '' Sahih'' we say :
1- what is ment by the two chapters (113-114) is not the inexsistance of the of the chapter's in the
quran ,but rather how it reads.
And proof of this:
*It was Narrarited by IBin Abi Dawod that Abo Hamza Said: i came to ibraheem with a my copy of
the quran and in it: And talked to him about some verses and some sora's, then Ibraheem said
erase this. because ibin masoud used to hate this and say dont write in allahs book what is not
from it,
(( and it is the same thing that Ibin masoud said (IF its True context) about chapter(113-114) ))
so they said that he means erase the name and NOT the sourah , and mostly because they
didnt EVER hear him say chapter (113-114) are not from the quran .
*The auther of (Manahil Alarifeen) commented about this by saying that Ibin Masoud saw it
writen in the wrong place or wrongly writen (( in the wronge order ))
*Alrazani said in his (tafseer) that he denied at first that they are from the mushaf (to be
written ) so people started carrying this to other, so he put them in his mushaf .
Conclusion : their is no clear proof or evidance that ibin masoud said clearly that the two
chapters(113-114) ( Al Falaq/Al Nas) are not from the quran , whether its in bokhari Or in
Imam Ahmads collection, and what we come to understand from this is two things:
1-Eather (shaz fee al matin){inbalanced or incorrect transmition} and this is in Imam
Ahmads collection
OR
2-Unclear translation.
As for the hadith in Bokhari it was mobham ( unclear) and what is unclear in bokhari witch is
an storng Book of hadith because of Chain of narrarition and correct transmition (motawatir)
(so many people narrarited and carried it) CAN NOT BE TRANSLATED by a (incorrect
transmition) like whats in Imam Ahmads collection Concerning this matter, and anyway all
that this proves to us is how illiterate these people are when it come to the science of Hadith.
And i thank allah for allowing me to put this furth
for more information https://www.kalemasawaa.com/vb/t4717.html
|