The Ahulbayt in Quran [Electronic resources] نسخه متنی

Some Sunni Reports on the Incompleteness of Quran

There are some traditions in Sihah Sittah (six authentic Sunni
collections) which are not accepted by Shia scholars.

Among
them, some are talking about the changes made in Quran * after
* the death of the Prophet.

As I will show, in some Sunnis
report 345 verses, two chapters of Quran (one of which is was as
much as ch. 9 in length) are missing from Quran.

Here I
give you some references in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and
other important collections which falsely allege that Quran is
incomplete.

Let me first start with Sahih Muslim.

Sahih Muslim

Muslim in the Seventh ( 7th ) part of his Sahih, in the book of Al
Zakat about the virtue of being satisfied with what ever God gives
about urging people to have that virtue, pp 139-140 (Arabic),

reported that Abu al-Aswad reported that his father said :

*(For English version of Sahih Muslim see)*

*(Chapter CCCXCI, p500, Tradition #2286)*

Abu Musa al-Ashari invited the Quran readers of Basra. Three
hundred ( 300 ) readers responded to his invitation. He told
them

You are the readers and the choice of the
People of Basra.

Recite the Quran and don't neglect it.

Other
wise a long time may elapse and your hearts will ne hardened as the
hearts of those who came before you were hardened.

We used to read a Chapter from the Quran similar to

Bara'ah in length and seriousness, but I forgot it.

I can remember from the Chapter only the following words :

Should a son of Adam own two valleys full of wealth, he should

seek a third valley and nothing would fill Ibn Adam's abdomen

but the soil.

We also used to read a chapter similiar to
the Musabbihat and I

forgot it.

I only remember out of
it the following:

"Oh you who believe, why do you say
what you do not do? (which is

now in another place in Quran 61:2) Thus a
testimony shall be

written on your necks and you will be
questioned about it on the

day of judgment.

" (which is a
little different than what is in

another place in Quran 17:13)

It is obvious that the above underlined words which Abu Musa
mentioned are

not from the Quran nor they are similar to any of the Words of God
in the

Quran.

It is amazing that Abu Musa claims that two ( 2 )
chapters from the

Quran are missing one of them is similar to Bara'ah in length!!! The

following traditions are before the above tradition in Sahih Muslim:

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI,
Tradition #2282:

Anas reported Allah's Messenger (may peace
be upon him) as saying: "If

the son of Adam were to possess two valleys
of riches, he would long

for the third one.

And the
stomach of the son of Adam is not filled

but with dust.

And Allah returns
to him who repents.

"

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI,
Tradition #2283:

Anas b.

Malik reported: I heard
the Messenger of Allah (peace be

upon him) as saying this (the sentence of
the above tradition),

but I do not know whether this thing was
revealed to him or not,

but he said so.

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI,
Tradition #2284:

Anas b.

Malik reported Allah's
Messenger (may peace be upon him) as

saying: If there were two valleys of gold
for the son of Adam, he

would long for another one, and his mouth
will not be filled with

dust, and Allah returns to him who repents.

Sahih Muslim (English), Chapter CCCXCI,
Tradition #2285:

Ibn Abbas reported Allah's Messenger (may
peace be upon him) as

saying: If there were for the son of Adam a
valley full of riches, he

would long to possess another one like it,
and Ibn Adam does not feel

satisfied but with dust.

And
Allah returns to him who returns (to

Him).

Ibn Abbas said: I do not
know whether it is from Quran or not,

and in the narration transmitted by Zubair
it was said: I do not know

whether it is from the Quran, and he made
no mention of Ibn Abbas.

Muslim also reported in the book of nursing ( al-Ridha ), v10

pages 29 (Arabic), that Aisha said the following :

There was in what was revealed in the Quran
that ten ( 10 ) times

of nursing known with certainty makes the
nursing woman a mother

of the nursed child.

This number
of nursing would make the woman

'Haram' to the child.

Then this
verse was replaced by ' five ( 5 )

known nursing ' to make the woman forbidden
to the child.

The

Prophet died while these words were
recorded and read in the Quran.

Also al-Zamakhshari recorded that Aisha said that the Quranic verse

enjoining stoning for adultery was written on a leaf, but the leaf

was accidentally eaten by a goat while the Prophet Muhammad was on
his

death-bed, and thus the verse was lost.

Umar [reportedly] Said Chapter 33 Is Incomplete:

al-Muttaqi Ali Ibn Husam al-Din in his book ( Mukhtasar Kanz al-Ummal,

printed on the margin of Imam Ahmed's Musnad, v2, p2 ) in his Hadith
about

chapter 33, that said Ibn Mardawayh

reported that Huthaifah said:

Umar said to me : How many verses are contained in the

Chapter al-Ahzab ? I said
72 ( seventy two ) or 73 ( seventy

three ) verses.

He
said : It was almost as long as the chapter

of the Cow, which
contains 287 ( two eighty seven ) verses, and

in it there was the verse
of stoning.

If we take the report of Ibn Mardawayh which Huthaifah attributed to
Umar

in which he said that the Chapter of al-Ahzab, which contained 72 (
Seventy

two ) verses, was as long as the Chapter of the Cow ( containing 287
) and

take the report of Abu Musa which says that a chapter equal in
length to

the Chapter of Bara'ah ( contains 130 ) was deleted from the Quran,
then

the deletion in the Quran according to these reports would be 345
Verses.

Sahih al-Bukhari

Al-Bukhari recorded in his Sahih, v8, pp 209-210, that

Ibn Abbas reported that Umar Ibn al-Khattab said the following in

a discourse which he delivered during the last years of the
caliphate.

*(For Arabic-English version of Sahih al-Bukhari see 8.

817:)*

When Umar performed his last Hajj, he
said:

Certainly Allah sent Muhammad with
the truth and revealed

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, some
one 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.

Again, we used to read in what we
found in the Book of God :

Do not
deny the fatherhood of your fathers in contempt

because
it is a disbelief on your part to be ashamed of

your
fathers.

More references of similar tradition:

- Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (in the Musnad of Umar under the caption
of

the Hadith al-Saqeefah, pp 47,55)

- Sirah of Ibn Hisham (Pub.

by Issa al-Babi al-Halabi of
Egypt 1955),

v2, p658

The above Hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari (Tradition 8.

817 ) as well
as

similar ones in Sahih al-Bukhari (Tradition 8.

816 and 9.

424(B))
all say

"Umar's last Hajj".

Would you tell us when this
Hadith could have been

told originally? How long had it been passed by then from the death
of

prophet? Or from the gathering of Quran?

Please also note that the above verse which was recited by Umar in
the

above tradition, is not in present Quran.

The following Hadith is narrated without any Hadith number in
Bukhari.

It is in the title of one of the chapter of Bukhari.

Fortunately,
it

was translated by the translator.

Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic-English version, vol 9, p212:

{Between Traditions 9.

281 and 9.

282}

(21) CHAPTER.

If a judge has to
witness in favor of a litigant when

he is a judge or he had it before he became
a judge (can he pass a

judgment in his favor accordingly or should
he refer the case to

another judge before whom he would bear
witness?).

And the judge

Shuraih said to a person who sought his
witness, "Go to the ruler so

that I may bear witness(before him) for
you.

" And 'Ikrima said, "Umar

said to 'Abdur-Rahman bin 'Auf, 'If I saw a
man committing illegal

sexual intercourse or theft, and you were
the ruler (what would you

do)?.

'Abdur-Rahman said, 'I
would regard your witness as equal to the

witness of any other man among the Muslims.

'Umar
said, 'You have

said the truth.

' 'Umar added:

If I were not afraid of the fact that
people may say that 'Umar has

added to the Quran extra (verses), I would
have written the Verse al-

Rajm (stoning to death of married
adulterers) with my own hands.

and Ma'iz confessed before the Prophet that
he had committed illegal

intercourse, whereupon the prophet ordered
him to be stoned to death.

It is not mentioned that the prophet sought
witness of those who were

present there.

Hammad said, "If an adulterer
confesses before a ruler once only, he

should be stoned to death.

" But
al-Hakam said, "He must confess four

times.

My questions here are:

1)- Do you agree that Umar stated clearly that the verse famous as

Rajm was in Quran originally (or was revealed
originally)?

2)- To discuss the second part, I have given it more closely
below:

.

-----.

| If I were not afraid of
the fact that people may say |

| that 'Umar has added to
the Quran extra (verses), I |

| would have written the
Verse Ar-Rajm (stoning to death |

| of married adulterers)
with my own hands.

|

|___________________________________________________________|

2.

a)- Was Umar afraid of people talking
behind him so and so?

2.

b)- Was he afraid of God MORE at the
same time he was saying?

(Was he MORE
fearful of God, or afraid of people MORE than

God?)

2.

c)- Is anybody allowed to be afraid
of people when revealing the

truth
about Quran is more important?

3)-

3.

1)- If Umar were NOT afraid of
people, would he have been

writing
the verse inside of Quran by his hand or not?

3.

2)- If you were Umar, with the same
knowledge and courage, would

you
have been adding this verse to Quran by your hand or

not?

4)-

4.

1)- Was Umar aware
of abrogation or not?

4.

2)- Was he aware of
abrogation more than present scholars or

not?

5)- Did he know that he should (or should NOT) have been adding the

verse inside of Quran if it is abrogated or not? (This is not
accepted

by Shia.

I will explain this situation very shortly.

Some
Sunnis say

that it can be abrogated practically, and remained OUTSIDE of Quran.

My question is that

Did he know that he should NOT have been adding
this verse

inside Quran since it is only practically
abrogated? )

In other words, if he knew the rule, why he insisted on adding it,
If he

did not know that, is the above rule an invention of some of Sunni

people who wanted to justify missing this verse?

-

Here is another example, that after the death of Prophet its is

alleged that the phrase "Him who created" has been added
to verse 92:3.

One of the narrator of this counterversy is Abdullah bin Masud.

As
I

mentioned, The prophet clearly indicated (by Sunni sources) that

Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of

Quran.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

468:

Narrated Ibrahim:

The companions of 'Abdullah (Ibn Mas'ud) came to Abu Darda',
(and

before they arrived at his home), he looked for them and
found them.

Then he asked them,: 'Who among you can recite (Quran) as 'Abdullah

recites it?" They replied, "All of us.

" He
asked, "Who among you knows

it by heart?" They pointed at 'Alqama.

Then he
asked Alqama.

"How did

you hear 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud reciting Surat al-Lail (The
Night)?"

Alqama recited:

'By the male and the female.

' Abu Ad-Darda said, "I
testify that I

heard me Prophet reciting it likewise, but these people want
me to

recite it:--

'And by Him Who created male and female.

' but by Allah, I
will not

follow them.

"

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.

85:

Narrated 'Alqama:

.

.

.

Abu Darda further asked, "How does 'Abdullah
(bin Mas'ud) recite the

Surah starting with, 'By the Night as it conceals (the
light).

" (92.

1)

Then I recited before him:

'By the Night as it envelops: And by the Day as it appears in

brightness; And by male and female.

' (91.

1-3) On this
Abu Ad-Darda'

said, "By Allah, the Prophet made me recite the Surah in
this way while

I was listening to him (reciting it).

"

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 5.

105:

Narrated Alqama:

I went to Sham and was offering a two-Rak'at prayer; I said,
"O Allah!

Bless me with a (pious) companion.

" Then I saw an
old man coming

towards me, and when he came near I said, (to myself),
"I hope Allah

has given me my request.

" The man asked (me),
"Where are you from?" I

replied, "I am from the people of Kufa.

" He
said, "Weren't there

amongst you the Carrier of the (Prophet's) shoes, Siwak and
the

ablution water container? Weren't there amongst you the man
who was

given Allah's Refuge from the Satan? And weren't there
amongst you the

man who used to keep the (Prophet's) secrets which nobody
else knew?

How did Ibn Um 'Abd (i.

e.

'Abdullah bin Mas'ud)
use to recite

Surat al-Layl (The Night; ch.

92)?" I
recited:--

"By the Night as it envelops By the Day as it appears in
brightness.

And by male and female.

" (92.

1-3) On that, Abu
Darda said, "By Allah,

the Prophet made me read the Verse in this way after
listening to

him, but these people (of Sham) tried their best to let me
say

something different.

"

Comments:

Please read the Verse itself.

It is

By Him Who created male and the female.

'
(92:3)

Do you see the word "Him who created" in that aayah?

If no, please verify the Quran that you have.

If yes, please tell us that these words are added to Quran or not?

As you see, what is written in the parentheses is missing in the

Hadith while it is in the Quran.

Do you think that the aayah is abrogated? If yes, please define

the word "abrogation " for us.

{Abrogation is to delete something from Quran by the order of the

prophet himself.

For example, there is a rule for a while,
then the

prophet brings God's order that the rule is extended and the
previous

rule is not acceptable any more.

Therefore, the previous
rule is

abrogated.

Now, do you think that "Him who
created" is abrogated?

If yes, tell us what you understand from abrogation.

Since
these words

are added, there is no room for abrogation here.

If
something were

deleted, you could say that.

Here, nothing is deleted from
the present

Quran.

Something is added already based on these
traditions.

}

Do you think that these words were explanatory words?

Your answer: Yes, they were:

Please tell us if the narrators of these
traditions knew what is

aayah and what is explanatory(commentary)
statement?

These narrators say that the people of their time
did not recite

their way, however, THEY WILL NOT CHANGE
ANYTHING, and THEY WILL

CONTINUE RECITING QURAN THAT WAY.

In addition, the commentary statements is not
inside the Quran

itself.

It is in tafsir.

However,
present Quran contains these

words "him who created" inside them.

Now,
please tell us that

the present Quran contains the commentary words
of Sahabah or

not?

---

Sunnis narrated that after the death of prophet, Quran was gathered
in

different ways, and by different people.

Those who did not
accept the

government' Quran (which was gathered by Abu-Bakr) kept their
version

of Quran at home and did not show it publicly.

However,
they did

recite them as they wanted in public domain.

Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of famous narrators of sunni sources.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

521:

Narrated Masriq:

'Abdullah bin 'Amr mentioned 'Abdullah bin Masud
and said, "I shall

ever love that man, for I heard the Prophet
saying, 'Take (learn) the

Quran from four: 'Abdullah bin Masud, Salim,
Mu'adh and Ubai bin

Ka'b.

'
"

The prophet clearly indicated (by sunni sources) that

Abdullah Ibn Masud is one of whom should be trusted on the matter of

Quran.

He, himself, says that:

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

524:

Narrated 'Abdullah (bin Mas'ud) : By Allah other than Whom
none has

the right to be worshipped! There is no Sura revealed in
Allah's Book

but I know at what place it was revealed; and there is no
Verse

revealed in Allah's Book but I know about whom.

This man had a different Quran (based on Sunni sources) with a
different

sequence of chapters and different set of aayaat.

As I
pointed out , he

narrated that one aayat inside the present Quran has an
extra word

"Him Who created".

and He told this to people in
different area.

One of these differences are the last two chapters of Quran.

He
believed

that these two chapters are not Quranic chapters and they are only
some

prayers (Du'aa).

Please read the following traditions very carefully.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

501:

Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:

I asked Ubai bin Ka'b, "O Abu AlMundhir! Your brother,
Ibn Mas'ud said

so-and-so (i.

e.

, the two Mu'awwidh-at do not belong
to the Quran).

"

Ubai said, "I asked Allah's Apostle about them, and he
said, 'They

have been revealed to me, and I have recited them (as a part
of the

Quran)," So Ubai added, "So we say as Allah's
Apostle has said.

"

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

500:

Narrated Zirr bin Hubaish:

I asked Ubai bin Ka'b regarding the two Muwwidhat (Surats of
taking

refuge with Allah).

He said, "I asked the
Prophet about them, He said,

'These two Surats have been recited to me and I have recited
them (and

are present in the Quran).

' So, we say as Allah's Apostle
said (i.

e.

,

they are part of the Quran"

%%%%
%%%% %%%% Note:
%%%%
%%%% %%%%

The explanations inside the parentheses are from the translator
(Muhammad

Muhsin Khan, University of al-Medina, Saudi Arabia).

They
are not mine.

%%%%
%%%%
%%%%
%%%%
%%%% %%%%

My comments:

1)- Do you agree that the speaker of these two traditions are "Ubai-ibn-

Ka'b"?

2)- Do you agree that he was talking about these two chapters of
Quran?

3)- Do you agree that in the first Hadith, the subject is about
"Ibn-

Masud"?

4)- Do you agree that Ubai-Ibn-Ka'b said that these two chapters are

inside of Quran, and Ibn-Masud thought that these
two are not inside of

Quran?

5)- Do you trust Ubai-Ibn-Ka'b on this matter, or do you trust

"Ibn-Masud" on THIS matter?

6)- If you reject any of them, how do you justify your act with the

first Hadith in this article where both of them
are trusted by the

prophet? How can you REMOVE and NOT remove these
two chapters from

Quran? Please explain, bring evidences, and
references for any Hadith

you may quote.

Thanks.

(I
already know what you may quote, so please

be careful in quoting them.

)

As I said, these traditions are REJECTED by Shia since they are
clearly

illogical, and against the true content of Quran.

This man, Abdullah-Ibn-Masud, had a different set of Quran too.

Please read the following Hadith and explain to us whether the Quran

of Abdullah Ibn Masud was the same as your Quran.

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

518:

Narrated Shaqiq:

Abdullah said, "I learnt An-Naza'ir which the Prophet
used to recite

in pairs in each Rak'a.

" Then Abdullah got up and
Alqama accompanied

him to his house, and when Alqama came out, we asked him
(about those

Suras).

He said, "They are twenty Suras that
start from the beginning

of al-Mufassal, according to the arrangement done be Ibn
Mas'ud, and

end with the Suras starting with Ha Mim, e.

g.

Ha
Mim (the Smoke).

and

"About what they question one another?" (78.

1)

-

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

514:

Narrated 'Umar bin al-Khattab:

I heard Hisham bin Hakim reciting Surat al-Furqan during the
lifetime

of Allah's Apostle and I listened to his recitation and
noticed that

he recited in several different ways which Allah's Apostle
had not

taught me.

I was about to jump over him during his
prayer, but I

controlled my temper, and when he had completed his prayer, I
put his

upper garment around his neck and seized him by it and said,
"Who

taught you this Surah which I heard you reciting?" He
replied, "Allah's

Apostle taught it to me.

" I said, "You have
told a lie, for Allah's

Apostle has taught it to me in a different way from yours.

"
So I

dragged him to Allah's Apostle and said (to Allah's Apostle),

"I heard this person reciting Surat al-Furqan in a way
which you

haven't taught me!" On that Allah's Apostle said,
"Release him, (O

'Umar!) Recite, O Hisham!" Then he recited in the same
way as I heard

him reciting.

Then Allah's Apostle said, "It
was revealed in this

way," and added, "Recite, O 'Umar!" I recited
it as he had taught me.

Allah's Apostle then said, "It was revealed in
this way.

This Quran

has been revealed to be recited in seven different ways, so
recite of

it whichever (way) is easier for you (or read as much of it
as may be

easy for you).

"

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

53:

Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:

I said to 'Uthman bin 'Affan (while he was collecting the
Quran)

regarding the Verse:-- "Those of you who die and leave
wives .

.

.

"

(2.

240) "This Verse was abrogated by an other Verse.

So
why should you

write it? (Or leave it in the Quran)?" 'Uthman said.

"O
son of my

brother! I will not shift anything of it from its place.

"

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 6.

60:

Narrated Ibn Az-Zubair:

I said to 'Uthman, "This Verse which is in
Surat-al-Baqara:

"Those of you who die and leave widows behind.

.

.

without
turning them

out.

" has been abrogated by another Verse.

Why
then do you write it

(in the Quran)?" 'Uthman said.

"Leave it
(where it is), O the son of

my brother, for I will not shift anything of it (i.

e.

the
Quran) from

its original position.

"

My comments: If the previously mentioned verses which are alleged to
be in

Quran as Sahih al-Bukhari claims, are abrogated, then why are they
missing

in the Quran? How can we justify the last two traditions? More over,
how

can something become abrogated after the death of Prophet?

If a verse is abrogated, there has to be an existing verse which

is better or equal than the previous one.

This is what
Quran testifies:

None of Our revelations do We abrogate or
cause to be forgotten,

but We substitute something better or
similar Do you not know that

Allah has power over all things? (Quran
2:106)

Thus the abrogated and abrogating verses are always in pair.

As the above Sunni traditions confirm, the abrogated verse must be
in

Quran.

There are quite a few verses in present Quran which
are clearly

stated in Tafaseer (of Sunni and Shia) that specific verses are
abrogated

by such and such verses.

The only abrogated verses which
do not exist

in the Quran are those which Allah cause them to be
"FORGOTTEN" (see

the above verse of Quran).

Since the forgotten verses were
not in the

mind of the prophet and the people, it is normal that these verses

are not in the present Quran, since nobody could remember them
because

of Allah's will.

The traditions mentioned from Sihah Sittah claim that some verses in
Quran

are missing and the companions not only * remember * them, but also
recite

them in public.

So it can not be abrogated since it is not
forgotten nor

we have any similar verses (abrogating pairs) in Quran for them.

Moreover,

the abrogation is only at the time of Prophet, and not after his
death.

However some of the above traditions allege that some companions
believed

that people after the death of Prophet have CHANGED the words of
Quran,

however, THEY WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING, and THEY WILL CONTINUE
RECITING

THEIR OWN VERSION OF QURAN.

Abrogation can not be an
answer for such

disputes.

Also al-Hakim An-Nisaboori in his book "Al-Mustadrak" in
the section of

commentary on the Quran, part two, p224, reported that Ubai

Ibn Kaab (whom the Prophet called the leader of al-ansar), said

that the Messenger of God said to him:

Certainly the Almighty commanded me to read the Quran
in

front of you, and he read "The unbelievers
from the people

of the Book and the pagans will not change their way
until

they see the evidence.

Those who disbelieve
among the people

of the scripture and the idolaters could not change
until the

clear proof came unto them.

A Messenger
from Allah, reading

purified pages.

.

.

" And of the
very excellent part of it:

"Should Ibn Adam ask for a valley full of wealth
and I grant it to

him, he would ask for another valley.

And
if I grant him that, he

would ask for a third valley.

Nothing would
fill the abdomen of Ibn

Adam except the soil.

God accepts the
repentance of anyone who

repents.

The religion in the eyes of God is
the Hanafiyah (Islam)

rather than Yahudiyya (Judaism) or Nasraniya
(Christianity).

Whoever

does good, his goodness will not be denied.

"

Sunni reference: al-Mustadrak by al-Hakim, section of commentary on
the

Quran, v2, p224

Al-Hakim wrote: This is an authentic Hadith.

al-Dhahabi
also considered

it authentic in his commentary (on al-Mustadrak).

al-Hakim
reported that

Obei Ibn Kabb used to read:

"Those who disbelieved had set up in
their hearts the

zealotry of the age of ignorance; and if
you had had a similar

zealotry, the Sacred Mosque would have been
corrupted, and God

[would have] brought down His peace of
reassurance upon His Messenger"

When al-Hakim said this is authentic according to the standards of
the two

sheikhs (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)!!! and when al-Dhahabi also
considered it

authentic in his Commentary on al-Mustadrak, v2, pp 225-226, and
when

Muslim report similar to this from Abu Musa Ash'ari which I
mentioned

earlier, then what will be the conclusion?

Those who claim that anyone who has recoded a tradition which
implies the

incompleteness of Quran is Kafir, should first pass this verdict for

al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Hakim, because they testified that such
absurd

traditions are authentic and have named their book "Sahih"!
This is

while the author of al-Kafi never claimed that his book is
all-authentic,

and mentioned that those traditions which contradict Quran should be

rejected.

Furthermore, let's suppose that al-Kulaini in his book, al-Kafi, had

recorded some traditions which may imply the incompleteness of Quran.

Why

should all the Shia be accused of the belief in the incompleteness
of the

Quran? al-Kulaini was not an infallible, and if a scholar like him
makes

a mistake in recording a tradition which later found to be weak, why
should

we attribute the mistake to millions of the Shia? If such an
accusation is

possible and permissible, why should we not accuse all the Sunnis of
the

belief of the incompleteness of the Quran because they are the
followers

of Umar who was quoted by al-Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad Ibn Hanbal and
Ibn

Mardawayh to have said that the Quran was incomplete, and that more
than

200 verses were deleted? Why should Umar, Aisha, Abu Musa not be
accused of

the same thing because of all of them stated the incompleteness of
the

Quran?

We believe that the Quran as it is now is the entire Quran without
any

subtraction or addition.

It is the Quran which no false
hood from the era

of pre revelation or post revelation entered it.

It is a
revelation from

the Mighty, the Praised.

Allah promised that He will
protect the Quran.

He

said:

"Certainly We sent down the Reminder
(i.

e.

, Quran), and certainly

we shall protect it" (Quran 15:9)

|.

.

|
| | |.

| /.

|| |.

|.

.

.

|.

|

.

q_D_9 |_7_|
4_| |_, | q _)]_|| |_,_|
_, .

_7_, |_, |

(_)
/
/
/
/ (_)

It is the Quran through which the Messenger and the Members of his
House

commanded us to test the authenticity of every Hadith, and accept
the

Hadith that agrees with the Quran and reject the Hadith which
contradicts

the Quran.

We believe that whoever says that the Quran is
incomplete, or

was added is completely wrong.

What was reported on this
subject from Umar,

Abu Musa, Bukhari, Muslim, Ahmad Hanbal, al-Hakim, and Kulaini is

completely rejected and absolutely unacceptable, if they want to
mean the

incompleteness of Quran.

Despite the Sunni brothers who believe they have some authentic
books,

Shi'a believe that only Quran is all-authentic, and all the
traditions

attributed to prophet and Imams, are subject to check with well-

understood concepts in Quran.

Some of the references of this article:

- Sahih Bukhari printed by Muhammad Ali Subaih in Egypt

- Sahih al-Bukhari, Arabic English version

- Sahih Muslim printed by Muhammad Ali Subaih in Egypt

- Sahih Muslim, English version

- Mustadrak by Hakim printed by al-Nasr in al-Riyadh 1335

- Musnad of Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, printed Sader Beirute Lebenon 1969