Shia Scholar al-Mufid and his belief in Tahrif of Quran


al-Salamu `Aleykum,

We all know that most of the early Rafidhah believed in Tahreef, from Kulayni to `Ali al-Qummi to al-Mufeed and the others… Some however, were an exception, like al-Murtada.

I want to take al-Mufeed as an example, this man was the teacher of al-Tusi, and he was the leader of the Shia in his time, he wrote some of their most important books.

al-Masa’il al-Sarawiyah by al-Mufid (d.413 hijri) page 78 – the ninth issue:

[There is no doubt, that what is between the two covers of the Quran, its whole content is Allah’s words and revelation (1), there is nothing from the words of mankind in it and it is the majority of the revelation (2).
And the rest of what was revealed by Allah most high is with the guardian of Shari`ah, the preserver of Ahkaam, none of it was lost (3). Although the one who has gathered what is found between the two covers today (4), has not included it along with what he collected (5) for some reasons that caused him to do so, such as:
His inability to know parts of it.
And: His doubt and uncertainty concerning it.
And: What he purposely kept out of it. (6)
Ameer al-Mu’mineen (as) had gathered the revealed Qur’an from beginning to end, and he compiled it the way it should have been, placing the Makki before the Madani, and the abrogated before the abrogation, and he placed everything in its correct location. (7)
This is why Ja`far bin Muhammad al-Sadiq (as) said: “By Allah if the Qur’an was recited as it was revealed you would have found our names in it just as those before us were named.” (8)
And he (as) said: “The Qur’an was revealed four parts, a quarter about us, a quarter about our enemies, a quarter are Sunan and examples, and a quarter is obligatory duties and rulings, and for us Ahlul-Bayt are the best parts.” (9)
However, it was authentically narrated from our Imams (as) that they were ordered to recite what is in between the two covers, and to not exceed it by addition or subtraction, until al-Qa’im rises, then he will recite for the people the Qur’an as Allah revealed it and as was gathered by Ameer al-Mu’mineen (10).]

Footnotes by me:

(1) He means all that is found in our present Qur’an are true words of Allah, obviously he doesn’t mean this is ALL the Qur’an. It means he doesn’t believe in additional Tahreef.
(2) Notice he says “Jumhour” meaning MOST of the revelation, not all of it.
(3) Meaning the rest of what was revealed is with the guardian, he most probably means the Mahdi.
(4) Meaning the first three Khulafa’ that collected the Qur’an we have today.
(5) He claims these Caliphs never included the “rest of what was revealed” for their own personal/political reasons.
(6) As you can see, he claims the Caliphs didn’t know parts of the Qur’an, so they missed them, they had doubts about other parts, so they skipped them, and finally they intentionally removed some parts.
(7) He’s telling us that the correct Qur’an that contains everything was only gathered by `Ali, and obviously we all know the story they narrate about the Caliphs rejecting his Qur’an.
(8) al-Mufid believes the names of the Imams are mentioned in the correct Qur’an.
(9) al-Mufid believes that half of the Qur’an talked about the Imams and their enemies, this part was omitted by the Caliphs.
(10) He believes the Mahdi will reveal the true Qur’an later, after this nation goes to hell for being misguided by Allah (Astaghfirullah).

by Hani
posted by 13S2010

40 Comments

Filed under Articles, Revealing Shia sect, Tahreef in Quran

40 responses to “Shia Scholar al-Mufid and his belief in Tahrif of Quran

  1. Ali Daf

    Assalamu alaikum wrwb.
    Jazaakallaahu khairan.
    However they try to play with words, Alllaah will EXPOSE THEIR HIDEOUS AGENDA.

  2. SuperTruthonly

    LOL – How do you defend yourself on this. ie WHY have mentioned sheikh Mufid and Kulaini about tahreef – AND – said nothing on verdict by Syed Mohshin al Hakeem, Syed Abul Qasim Al khoei, Syed Hadi al Husaini al Milani, Syed al Golpaygani and others. According to these there no alteration whatsoever in quran.

    Since you have given the views of two writers knowing that shias do not consider any books as ‘SAHI’ other than Quran – NOW lets see what books of Ah-lul Sunnah report about Tahreef in Quran.

    Hadhrath Umar’s says: one-third of the Qur’an been lost?
    Sahih al Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210,

    Al-Muttaqi ‘Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book “Mukhtasar Kanz al-‘Ummal” printed on the margin of Imam Ahmad’s Musnad, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33, said that Ibn Mardawayh reported that Hudhayfah said: ‘Umar said to me ‘How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?’ I said, ’72 or 73 verses.’ He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning.

    Suyuti also records the following words of Abdullah ibne Umar:
    “No one can proclaim that I have found the Qur’an complete because most of the Qur’an has been lost”. – “Tafseer Durre Manthur” as-Suyuti Volume 1 page 104

    And you know about the incident of Goat eating quran

    NOW WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT EXPOSING SHIAS YOU WERE ON ABOUT?

    • You said:

      LOL – How do you defend yourself on this. ie WHY have mentioned sheikh Mufid and Kulaini about tahreef – AND – said nothing on verdict by Syed Mohshin al Hakeem, Syed Abul Qasim Al khoei, Syed Hadi al Husaini al Milani, Syed al Golpaygani and others. According to these there no alteration whatsoever in quran.

      We agree that there are Shia scholars who reject Tahrif of Quran but this post is about al-Mufid one of the founders of your sect. The giants of your religion believed in Tahrif of Quran from Kulaini to Mufid to Majlisi. Why is it that your classical scholars of your sect believed in corruption of Quran? This is because they wanted to attack the Sahaba in every away possible from ‘accusing them of oppressing Ahlulbayt, changing the religion, changing the sunnah and changing the Quran’. Other reason that your classical scholars believed in Tahrif of Quran is because in the Quran there is nothing about the foundation of your Twelver Imami sect.

      You said:

      Since you have given the views of two writers knowing that shias do not consider any books as ‘SAHI’ other than Quran – NOW lets see what books of Ah-lul Sunnah report about Tahreef in Quran.

      This shows your ignorance for accusing the Ahl-Sunnah and the Sahaba for believing in this Kufr. They were the ones who preserved, memorised and published the Quran. This was one of the reasons your scholars rejected the authenticity of the current because it was compiled by the Sahaba. Most of these narrations are about Naskh (abrogated verses).

      You said:

      Hadhrath Umar’s says: one-third of the Qur’an been lost?
      Sahih al Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210,

      Such narration does not exist in Sahih Bukhari. Liar.

      You said:

      Al-Muttaqi ‘Ali bin Husam al-Din in his book “Mukhtasar Kanz al-’Ummal” printed on the margin of Imam Ahmad’s Musnad, Volume 2, page 2, in his hadith about chapter 33, said that Ibn Mardawayh reported that Hudhayfah said: ‘Umar said to me ‘How many verses are contained in the chapter of al-Ahzab?’ I said, ’72 or 73 verses.’ He said it was almost as long as the chapter of the Cow, which contains 287 verses, and in it there was the verse of stoning.

      Once again no proof that they believed the Quran was changed. I was able to trace the above according to the page and number given. Al Suyuti cited the above report among many other reports in the chapter entitled “The Abrogating and the Abrogated,” section entitled “Verses Whose Recitation Was Abrogated But Not Their Legal Ruling.” Enough said.

      Note: The Tafsir of Ibn Mardawayh doesn’t exist, it is lost.

      You said:

      Suyuti also records the following words of Abdullah ibne Umar:
      “No one can proclaim that I have found the Qur’an complete because most of the Qur’an has been lost”. – “Tafseer Durre Manthur” as-Suyuti Volume 1 page 104

      The above refers to a famous saying of Ibn Umar, once again deceptively mistranslated so as to mislead readers to think it means other than its actual meaning.

      The words used by Ibn Umar for the terms given as “acquired,” “disappeared,” and “what has survived” above were respectively “ahattu” (I have encompassed), “faatahu” (escapes him), and “ma tayassara minhu” (whatever amount of it has been facilitated). The actual meaning of Ibn Umar’s words is:

      “Let no one say: I have encompassed the whole of the Quran (its meanings). How does he know what all of it is when much of the Quran escapes him? Rather, let him say: I have encompassed whatever amount of it has been facilitated (for me to know).”

      Ibn Umar was famous for his strictness in refraining from interpreting the Quran, even criticizing Ibn Abbas’s interpretive zeal in the beginning, then accepting its authority. He was not referring to the collection of the Quran! But only to the ethics of the exegete, in the same line as Ibn Abbas’s saying narrated by Tabari and cited by Suyuti and Zarkashi: “There are ambiguous verses in the Quran which no one knows besides Allah. Whoever claims that he knows them, is a liar.”

      Also Ibn Abbas’s and Abdul Rahman ibn Awf’s saying: “The Quran has an outward meaning, (literally ‘a back’) (zahr) and an inward meaning (literally ‘an inside’) (batn).”

      And you know about the incident of Goat eating quran

      Yes the goate ate the verses that were already abrogated during the life time of the Prophet (saw). Learn something about the topic of Naskh wa Mansukh before talking about these issues.

      NOW WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT EXPOSING SHIAS YOU WERE ON ABOUT?

      Try again.

      • SuperTruthonly

        Thanks for admitting that there are Shia scholars who reject Tahrif of Quran – At least that puts an end to slandering us.
        Now, talking about, what you described as ‘the giants of shia religion, (Kulaini, Mufid, Majlisi). Have you ever heard shia refer to their work as ‘SAHI’ – I take it that you understand what ‘SAHI’ means. – While you expose your hate against Shia, targeting the work of the three scholars, WHY do you forget (your giants) SAHI Bukhari, SAHI MUSLIM, SAHI Tirmidhi, and SAHI Abul fida? ARE YOU TELLING US THAT ‘YOUR GIANTS’ never said any thing wrong? (Example – Prophet(s) urinating while standing, Prophet dancing whilst carrying Ariesha on his shoulders, Prophet marrying a 6yeaer old) Are you saying that Umar and Ayiesha (according to your SAHI sitaat) never claimed that Qur.an was incomplete? NICE TRY.
        ALSO,
        1) Why do shias need to manufacture (a lie) ‘issue of tahreef in Qur’an’ to help attacks on Sahaba? When there are 100’s of other indisputable things (Oppression on Ahlul bayt etc) already mentioned in your books. – That’s really stupid.

        2) Talking about, what you said, i.e. ‘in the Quran there is nothing about the foundation of your Twelver Imami sect., — Is there any foundation of your 4 sunni sects or choosing of Khalifs in Qur’an?
        AND have you asked shia people or shia ulemah to prove to you, the belief in imamah and the respect for the Ah-lul bayt from Qur’an and Sunnah BEFORE making rash statement?
        ALSO – TAKE NOTE , I have not said Sunni people believe in tahreef in Quran though the statements of tareef come from your (giants) SAHI books WHILE you are trying to use the books of Mufeed & Kulaini to prove that Shias (standing before you) believe in Tahreef – (A deliberate deception on your part).
        IF YOU WERE INTELLIGENT you would know that there are many books on various subjects from researchers in the past whose findings are today found to be faulty – Similarly, Many Shia and Sunni researchers wrote books, PUTTING FORWARD THEIR RESEARCH – and today people find their research and their findings erroneous. IT IS STUPID TO USE THE BOOKS TO DEFAME AND ATTACK EITHER SHIAS OR SUNNI. If you really want to attack/dispute us YOU ARE WELCOME – TRY TO PROVE WRONG, WHAT WE REALLY BELIEVE.
        Talking about my ignorance, You should not talk about our perception in sahabah – Until you have understood our stand on the subject. 1) Can you prove from Qur’an or Sunnah of prophet(s), that you were allowed to elect or choose khalifs? 2) Are you saying that Sahabah did not sin and all sahabah were all good? They were pious and righteous, nice and compassionate? Do read Qur’an – Sura 5:67 – Who is Allah talking about protecting prophet from? AND TO THINK YOU PROJECT THE IMAGE OF all sahabah as if they were like the messengers of Allah(S).
        Also about the reference I gave you – Hadhrath Umar’s says: one-third of the Qur’an been lost? – Sahih al Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210, It is obvious that when you come across something you don’t like – you call people liars – Know that calling me liar will not alter the truth – I just gave you few reffs – I don’t know how you would react if I gave 100’s of other. JUST read your SAHI sitaat – They are full of all such things – try to find out where Salmaan Rushdie got his material for satanic verses from. May be you would also like to say, BUKHARI, MUSLIM, TIRMIDHI and others were liars too. LOOOL.
        JUST to add, — if you think what I said was mistranslated – why don’t you translate them in you next post. – ALSO REMEMBER – the famous words of Umar, at the time, prophet Muhammad(s) lay in his bed nearing end of life, when prophet(s) asked for paper and pen –Umar said ‘Qur’an is enough for us’ – DON’T TELL ME YOU WILL DENY THAT TOO – Was Qur’an enough? If so why are Muslims divided into so many sects.
        AND IF Quran was enough, why Umar couldn’t tell us the secrets behind “Alif, Laam, Meem”? At the time he was very wise in preventing prophet(s) from writing something. It is humanity to grant a dying person his wish – here these Muslims would not grant the prophet of Allah his last of wishes – How do you defend against this?
        LOGICALLY I SEE UMAR AS VERY WRONG _ AND TO THINK, IF HE WAS WRONG IN THIS, IMAGINE HOW MANY OTHER WRONG HE DID DURING HIS KHILAFAT, but than according to you he cant do any wrong – he is indisputable righteous, as if he were infallible – when it comes to shias referring to the Ahlul bayt as infallible Masoom – like Christians you change your tune and attack us on the issue. i.e. ahlul bayt cannot be masoom BUT Umar is faultless, above criticism forgetting what Quran says about the ahlul bayt. The same Qur’an never gave such praise to the Sahabah.
        You said Ibn Umar was famous for his strictness in refraining from interpreting the Qur’an, even criticizing Ibn Abbas’s – CANT YOU SEE THE CONTRADICTION IN YOUR WORDS – You are not only you make them heroes and ignore the ah-lul bayt – BUT- you come out telling us that those who did not posses the knowledge of ambiguous verse were strict in the interpretation of Qur’an – i.e. like saying you don’t know Qur’an but you are strict in its interpretation – NOW HOW CAN ONE DEBATE WITH SUCH LOGICS — LOL
        You ignore the words of prophet(s) – “Ana medinatul ilm wa ali un Baabu ha” – You Leave Ali(a) and go for knowledge from other – that’s clever isn’t it.

      • Typical Shia. When refuted on a topic jump to other topics. Those topics have been answered on this forum.

        It is not ‘Sahi’ it is written ‘Sahih’ صحیح. Learn the basics before talking about other issues.
        This is the problem when one talks with an ignorant person. I am not talking about their works whether they are ‘Sahih’ or not. I am talking about their beliefs on Tahrif of Quran. Mufid, Kulaini and hundreds of other Shia scholars said this Quran has been corrupted by Sahaba, Majlisi even said the narrations on Tahrif of Quran in Shia books are Mutawatir. There are thousands of narrations on Tahrif in Shia books.

      • SuperTruthonly

        Typical sunni – When you cant answer you have to use face saving tactics.
        + For you information I have used transliteration – In transliteration Muhammad is also written Muhamad, mohamed etc – Nobody takes objection – You can’t always transliterate accurately – DON’T TRY TO BE TOO CLEVER
        + Bullying tactics wont save you from embarrassment.
        + What does it matter what Mufid, or kulaini write there are 100’s of other writers are you going to bother with their work as well – I’s say good luck to you if you want to waste your time.
        + Also while you are at it do write something about the errors by sunni writers.

  3. Hugh Slaman

    “Why do shias need to manufacture (a lie) ‘issue of tahreef in Qur’an’ to help attacks on Sahaba? When there are 100’s of other indisputable things (Oppression on Ahlul bayt etc) already mentioned in your books. – That’s really stupid.”

    The Rafidi Shias “need to manufacture (a lie) the ‘issue of tahreef in Qur’an’ to help attacks on Sahaba” simply because all their other lies are easily exposed as lies. So they need to have lots and lots of lies, huge multitudes of lies, to distract and confuse people from the truth. Moreover, they need to explain why the fundamentals of their belief system are not mentioned in the Quran.

    There is a hadith the Rafidi Shia ascribe to Imam Jafar: “The people following this religion — Shi’ism — lie so much that the Devil himself needs to learn from them.”

    • SuperTruthonly

      Your ugly hatred can be seen loud and clear by the public at large.. Lets see who are the real Rafidhi – Is it Shias or is it hate filled taqfiri people like you.

      You know what is a Rafidhi – ‘One who departs from the sunnah of prophet Muhammad – one whose acts do not concur with the teachings of prophet Muhammad.

      If you are not a Rafidhi, can you prove to us that Qur’an, and/or Prophet Muhammad allowed you to elect a Khalif to represent Allah, after his demise? – No Sunni has ever been able to prove this to our knowledge – Logically, If you cannot prove this, than following the khilafat of Abubakr, Umar and Uthman without any injunctions from Quran or Directives from prophet Muhammad makes you THE ACTUAL RAFIDHI. You have done that which neither Quran nor Prophet(s) allowed you.

    • Ali Daf

      Not Only that bro Hugh Slaman, but the infallible Rafidhi Imam (not the true AhlulBayt Imams though) have admiiited that 90 percent of their religion is built on a strong foundation of LIES (TAQIYYAH). So what else do we expect from these young lame ducks who have been programd with Khuzaabalaat (heresy)?

      • SuperTruthonly

        I think tuqyyah is part of your faith – because we have heard many lies from you 1) You talked about a shia Qur’an with 1000’s of extra ayiets – where is it ? Why nobody has ever seen it or produced it if it exist 2) you said Ibn saba was the founder of Shia Islam, ibn saba is a fictional character created by a liar Sayf Ibn Umar al-Tamimi. 3) And this tuqqyyah nonsense – another lie while all the time its you who are lying – If you are not lying I challenge you to produce proof for the claim you have just made.

      • 1) According to many Shia classical Scholars, even contemporary ones, the real Quran is with the 12th Imam and when he appears, he will bring the real Quran.

        2) Was Ibn Saba, the one who laid the foundation of Shia sects, a fictional character?

        3) The reality of Shia Taqqiyah:
        http://gift2shias.com/2010/01/30/al-taqqiyah-revealed/

        Posts about Shia Taqqiyah on this blog:
        https://islamistruth.wordpress.com/tag/taqqiyah/

      • SuperTruthonly

        Regarding Ibn saba, the only person who made up the fiction was saif ibn Abdullah – There is no record of ibn saba from any other historian – Saif ibn Abdullah has been referred to as a liar by many sunni ulemah – So much for that lousy work, that one cannot even class as a scholarly article. Tukya is a Wahabi nonsense we have never been shy to tell you what we think on the contrary you cannot even stand the logical debate we throw into the arena. Why would we need to lie when we have un-refutable argument to prove our belief. AND FINALLY Bukhari reports that Umar and Ayiesha claimed that Quran is incomplete – Do you challenge this? Also I have in my possession fatwa from leading Shia mujtahideen that there has been no alteration whatsoever in Quran – What have you got to say about that?

      • It is ‘Saif Ibn Umar’ not ‘Saif ibn Abdullah’.

        Anyways, this claim has been refuted on that link, just check it.

      • SuperTruthonly

        Thanks for correcting me – BTW – Its not acceptable to use the work of others to say, ‘the point is refuted’ – People distort the truth to push forward their view even when what they claim is a lie. You need to put forward your argument – why you believe this person Sayf ibn umar was the real being – If he really lived people would know where his grave is located, and that family he descends from, who are his other relatives, – like the knowledge we have available on other personalities in history.

  4. Ali Daf

    SuperTruthonly said : [Thanks for admitting that there are Shia scholars who reject Tahrif of Quran ].
    MY QUESTION TO HIM IS:
    1. THESE GROUP YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, WHAT IS THEIR OPINION/ FATWA ON ANYBODY WHO BELIEF THAT THE QURAAN IS CORRUPT IN ANY WAY????
    2. YOU MIGHT NOT BE A SCHOLAR BT WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON ANY PERSON WHOEVER HE OR SHE MIGHT BE WHO BELIEFS THAT TH QURAAN IS CORRUPT IN ANY WAY???

  5. Hugh Slaman

    SuperTruthonly,

    You wrote: “What does it matter what Mufid, or kulaini write”

    I answer: good, so you agree that these people believed in the corruption of the Quran.

    Furthermore: these people are among the leaders and pillars of the Twelver Shia sect, along with Majlisi. These people are considered highly reliable authorities among the Twelver Shia. And their belief in the corruption of the Quran is KUFR i.e. disbelief. So the hadiths and information of the Twelver Shia sect have been transmitted by disbelievers, and hence cannot be trusted.

    The significance of this article, and the significance of this information that you cannot refute, is this: *Twelver Shi’ism cannot be trusted*. We cannot take hadiths or opinions from disbelievers, i.e. people who claim the Quran was corrupted.

    • SuperTruthonly

      I have not checked the ref. so I don’t know if its a lie. AND go read my post again Understand it before you answer. Talking about the pillar of …… Is umar not the pillar of you faith – Did he not collect sticks to burn Fatimah’s house hours after prophet(s) was buried – So what have you to say about that?

      • No, Umar(ra) didn’t collect sticks to burn any house. Not proven from any reliable report, all you see is bunch of fabricated reports narrated by liars. Just search this blog you will find your answer.

  6. Hugh Slaman

    SuperTruthonly,
    When the major figures of your sect claimed that the Quran was corrupted, how do we know that you and Shia scholars who oppose this are not using TAQIYYA?
    Shia scholars allow taqiyya even in teaching fundamental religious beliefs, even when there is no physical threat; Sunni scholars do not allow this at all.

    • SuperTruthonly

      For you information it was umar and Ayiesha who claimed Qur’an was incomplete – reported in your SAHI Bukhari – Go check it out .

      • Provide your evidence if you are truthful.

      • SuperTruthonly

        You wanted reff:-
        Sermon delivered by Hadhrath Umar during his last Hajj as Khalifa: in which he says, one-third of the Qur’an been lost?
        – Sahih al Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210.

        Hadhrath Ayesha testifies to a ‘missing’ verse on stoning
        “When the verses “Rajm” [Stoning] and ayah “Rezah Kabir” descended, they were written on a piece of paper and kept under my pillow. Following the demise of Prophet Muhammad (S) a goat ate the piece of paper while we were mourning.
        1. Sunan Ibne Majah, Volume 2, Page 39, Published Karachi.
        2. Musnad Imam Ahmad, Volume 6, Page 269, Published Beirut.
        3. Taweel Mukhtalif Al Hadees, Page 310, Published Beirut

        There are more

        Many sunni writers in the past have also claimed Qur’an incomplete.

        BOTTOM LINE – TODAY BOTH SHIA AND SUNNI ACCEPT THAT WHAT WE HAVE IN OUR HANDS IS THE ORIGINAL QURAN THAT PROPHET(S) LEFT WITH US – THERE HAS BEEN NO ALTERATIONS IN IT WHATSOEVER.

        THESE FALSE ACCUSATIONS AGAINST SHIA COME FROM PARTICULARLY THE WAHABL/SALAFI WHO ARE MORTAL ENEMIES OF SHIAS AND STRIVE TO DIVIDE MUSLIMS.

        DAYS BETWEEN 12TH RABBIUL AWWAL AND 17TH RABBIUL AWWAL (BIRTH OF PROPPHET(S)) ARE MARKED AS UNITY WEAK – WAHABI/SALAFI DO NOT WANT TO SEE THE UNITY, SO ACCORDING TO THEM CELEBRATING (being happy at) THE BIRTH DAY OF PROPHET (S) IS HARAM.

        AND I find the product of their little brains laughable – Its haram to be happy at the birth date of prophet Muhammad but when it comes to the birth of their own son, I don’t think they would dare put on a long miserable face else they will have a rolling pin on their head as compliment from their wives. — In fact these Wahabi/salafi I know distribute sweets to neighbours and friends to mark the birth of their own sons. Alhl of the sudden they forget their biddah or haram speech to the world.

      • You wanted reff:-
        Sermon delivered by Hadhrath Umar during his last Hajj as Khalifa: in which he says, one-third of the Qur’an been lost?
        – Sahih al Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210.

        I am asking you for the last time. Quote the narration with Arabic text then we will see how truthful you are.

        EDIT:

        OK I found the narration, that you copy-pasted, on a Shia website and it simply shows how Shia websites are ran by bunch of ignorants. I quote from their website:

        In Sahih al Bukhari Volume 8, pages 209-210, we read this sermon delivered by Hadhrath Umar during his last Hajj as Khalifa:

        1. “Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with the truth, and revealed to him the Book. One of the revelations which came to him was the verse of stoning. We read it and understood it”.

        “The Messenger of God stoned and we stoned after him. I am concerned that if time goes on, someone may say, ‘By God, we do not find the verse of stoning in the Book of God;’ thus, the Muslims will deviate by neglecting a commandment the Almighty revealed.”

        “Stoning is in the Book of God. It is the right punishment for a person who commits adultery if the required witnesses are available, or there was pregnancy without marriage or adultery is admitted.”

        I talks about the abrogated verses of Rajm (stoning). The verses were abrogated from the Quran but their rulings remained.

        As far the narration attributed to Sayyida Aisha (ra) then it shows your ignorance. I already replied to you about it yet you repeat the same thing. Do you have reading problems? The goat ate the verses that were already abrogated during the lifetime of the Prophet (saw). The narration itself is so clear (it talks about rajm and reza kabir) that only an ignorant person would try to quote it. Learn about the Naskh and Mansukh before commenting here.

        Don’t try to attribute the Kufr that the founders of your religion believed in to Muslim scholars. Muslim scholars consider anyone who doubts the authenticity of Quran as Kafir. Even your contemporary scholars believe the real Quran is with the 12th Imam, the current Quran is not the true Quran. This is the Kufr that many of your early classical scholars believed. From Kulaini, to Qumi, to Majlisi to even Shia scholars of today. Your sect was founded by people who disbelieved in the authenticity of Quran.

        If you want to discuss this matter in detail then come to this Shia-Sunni discussion forum: http://www.Islamic-Forum.net

      • SuperTruthonly

        Don’t play games.with words AND don’t just push the illogical into this discussion

        When we write an article we end up erasing a whole chapter because we realize our mistake – Are you saying that Allah(swt) makes mistakes too – i.e. He erases (abrogates) the whole chapter, as long as Sura Baqrah in length?

        THERE IS SUCH THING AS LOGICAL THINKING. One or two injunctions abrogated to replace with better ones is understandable But you cannot say abrogation of whole the whole chapter is logical. Besides where is the chapter that replaced it?

        I know the verse that says, when Allah abrogates a verse he brings a better one – i.e. abrogating a temporary injunction with a better more permanent befitting one. But Abrogating a whole Chapter of approx 286 verses and nobody remembers anything other than 2 verses is asking too much.

        Your trick – Arabic manipulation of truth, and show of fake intelligent discourse, does not work.

      • I am not playing games. You lied about Umar (ra) that he said 1/3 of Quran has been lost.

        The problem is your lack of knowledge about the topic of Naskh and Mansukh. They were abrogated during lifetime of the Prophet (saw). And that goat, that you people quote a lot out of ignorance, ate the abrogated verses. Similary, here Umar (ra) is clearly saying that it was abrogated.

        I know your source of information is the notorious -answering-ansar-, don’t worry soon a complete refutation of that website on this topic will be released, with the help of Allah.

        Like I said if you want to discuss the matter in detail then come to this disucssion forum: http://www.Islamic-Forum.net

  7. Hugh Slaman

    “Bullying tactics wont save you from embarrassment.”

    Classic Shi’ism: Shia bully accuses others of bullying him. The Twelver evangelists are just troublemakers who act like victims when it suits them.

    • SuperTruthonly

      When have I bullied you – LIAR – Why are you dodging the question I put before you?

      • Hugh Slaman

        “When have I bullied you – LIAR –”

        Excuse me? When exactly did I say you had attempted to bully *me* in particular?
        By the way, if you leave aside the screaming capitals, and the name-calling, you may come across as *calmer* and *wiser* than you do now.

        “Why are you dodging the question I put before you?”

        I have deliberately ignored your worthless question because of its complete *irrelevance* to the topic of this post, which is the fact that noted Shia scholar Mufid believed in the corruption of the Quran, (along with other Shia giants such as Kulayni, Majlisi). How on earth can you take knowledge from people who are so *ignorant*?

        Please don’t tell me about Shia scholars who think the Quran is not corrupted. The fact that some of them are not completely brain-dead, and can recognize some obvious truths, is neither here nor there.

      • SuperTruthonly

        Again I don know about Sheik al Mufeed and Kulaini’s view on Quran – Havent had time to check, BUT I know your giants Bukhari whom you have conveniently refrain from mentioning also reports about tahreef in Qur’an, quoting Ayiesha and Umar – You called me a liar – I am surprised you know about Kulaini and Mufeed but you do not know about your Sunni giants Bukhari and others reporting the same – I also noted your refutation in earlier post – I am busy right now, Inshallah, I will post the reference soon.

      • You don’t know about the founders of your religion doubting the authenticity of Quran? And you spend day and night trying to find faults in Companions? You are so confused and ill-informed that you quote reports about abrogated verses and claim it is Tahrif like you did with the one which said goat ate the verses.

        All the verses that Shia use to prove their sect like 33:33 and 4:59 and others; the founders of your religion believed that these verses were distorted and changed by Sahaba because they realised using these verses to prove Shiism is weak so they claimed Sahaba changed it. Not to forget the thousands of narrations about Tahrif attributed to your divinely appointed infallible Imams.

        If you want to discuss the matter in detail come to this discussion forum: http://www.Islamic-Forum.net

      • Here is refutation of Shia website answering-ansar on the issue of Tahrif:
        Part 1: http://twelvershia.net/2014/01/06/response-to-who-believes-the-quran-has-been-a-victim-of-tahreef-part-1/
        Part 2 is coming, insha’Allah.

  8. Hugh Slaman

    “I know the verse that says, when Allah abrogates a verse he brings a better one – i.e. abrogating a temporary injunction with a better more permanent befitting one. But Abrogating a whole Chapter of approx 286 verses and nobody remembers anything other than 2 verses is asking too much.”

    Eh, what?
    Who, in all history, ever claimed that a whole chapter of 286 verses was abrogated?
    You are evidently living in a realm of fantasy. Stop reading useless Shia websites, for the sake of your sanity!

  9. Hugh Slaman

    “I am busy right now, Inshallah, I will post the reference soon.”

    You anonymous internet Shia propagandists use this “I’m busy” tactic quite a lot.

    Seriously, you are too lost to benefit from this debating stuff, because you know nothing at all of any value, just rumours and fantasies from other anonymous internet Shia propagandists.

    Instead, get up at night, do a proper wudu, pray two rakats, and in prostration *beg* Allah to open your heart to what pleases him, whatever it is.

    Indeed, He can open the same doors for you that he did for me, if He wills.

    • SuperTruthonly

      Huge Slaman – Your manners are something to be desired. OK – since you challenged me, here it is.

      [REMOVED BY ADMIN

      COPY-PASTE of long articles from Shia websites is not allowed here.

      If you want answer to every single of the report in your copy-paste then come to Islamic-Forum.net. Comment section here is not for copy-past of long articles. ]

      • SuperTruthonly

        To admin.
        They were references I could scan from books and post so what difference does it make – The references point to Tahreef in Sunni books WHILE these haters (with little knowledge) try to prove Shias believe in Tehreef – I don’t consider you action Fair.

      • Copy-pasting long articles is against this blog’s rules. If you want to discuss long articles and narrations then come to the discussion forum: http://www.Islamic-Forum.net

        What you copy-pasted, shows your lack of knowledge on this field and can be easily refuted (and has already been refuted on different sites) and this comment section is not for your desperate copy-paste.

      • SuperTruthonly

        To Admin.
        May be i can accept that Copy paste is against blog rules
        BIUT How does Copy paste show lack of Knowledge? Would you like to prove your point?
        Should you not just stick to Admin duties rather than making illogical statements.

  10. Hugh Slaman

    “BIUT How does Copy paste show lack of Knowledge? Would you like to prove your point?”

    Seriously? Do you really need to have each and every thing explained to you?
    *Face-palm*

    Copying and pasting from Shia websites shows a lack of knowledge, because anyone with a minimal level of knowledge about these debates would be easily able to spot the flaws and absurdities and misquotations and inaccuracies in the Shia websites.

    These are centuries-old old topics, not new topics. If you had the tools for research,you could easily find many books of logical, factual refutation of the Twelvers’ propaganda, and you would not be revealing your ignorance by copying and pasting from useless Shia websites, and then making a fool of yourself by wondering why copying and pasting reveals ignorance.

    • SuperTruthonly

      1) You have proves that you are biased without doubt. Copy paste from Shia websites is wrong BUT probably Copy paste from Sunni website is OK right? So why are you hosting these debates.- Note your statement also reveals your hate for Shias. (i.e. Twelvers’ propaganda). If you had stomach for it, such words would not come out from your mouth – You’d be taking this opportunity to preach the truth as you see it. Seems as if 12ers are giving you hard time.

      2) And talking about minimal knowledge – You probably believe that these debates are for UNI graduates in Islam – Why don’t you put the sign People with less knowledge not welcome. Also put that down in you blog rules that participants should have tools for research. BTW where are your blog rules?

      3) If you really believe you are tight and shia-12er are propagandist – I have serious questions for you – I’ll find opportunity to raise then at you discussion forum – Hope you will be there to respond.

      • Hugh Slaman

        SuperTruthonly,

        You are not even able to read this blog accurately, so how do you hope to be able to understand hadiths or Sunni-Shia debates?

        Here is an example of a gross error you are making. Contrary to what you seem to think, I, Hugh Slaman, am not the author of this blog. I do not make the rules here. It is not for me to put signs about who is welcome and who is not. I am not hosting these debates. I do not know where the blog rules are. Is this clear enough?

        Most of your post is addressed to the wrong person, so I shall ignore it.

        Again, with this kind of error in simple comprehension, you will never be able to sift through the evidence of what happened over 1200 years ago!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s