Assalamu 'ala man itaba’a Al-Houda,
as promised here is the challenge:
Bring me a single narration from your books which says the Sahabah accepted Ali’s compilation and thus what we have today is that compilation.
wa salamu 'ala man itaba’a Al-Houda
On the various codices of the Quran compiled by our Imams
http://www.islamic-paths.org/Home/English/Quran/History/Old_Manuscripts.htm
The first person to start the collection of the Qur’an after the demise of the Prophet (S) was 'Ali ibn Abi Talib (A). He did so in accordance with the instructions and testament of the Prophet (S). [33] He arranged the verses chronologically and mentioned their context and place of revelation.
Ibn al-Nadim writes: “After the demise of the Prophet (S) 'Ali (A) vowed not to leave his home until he had collected the Qur’an. He remained at home for three days and collected the Qur’an. He was the first one to have compiled the Qur’an from memory; this compilation remained in the custody of the family of Ja’far”. [34]
It is inferred from the observations of Ibn al-Nadim that 'Ali (A) had already memorized the Qur’an before the demise of the Prophet (S) and after his (S) demise he retrieved it from his memory and compiled it. Perhaps he had already written parts of it, because even a highly skilled scribe cannot write the entire Qur’an in three days from memory or copy it from another copy. Since there is no evidence that 'Ali (A) copied the Qur’an from another copy, it follows that he had previously written the Qur’an as and when it was revealed in that order, and since the Prophet (S) was aware of 'Ali’s (A) work and his writing of the Qur’an, he (S) instructed him (A) to collect and compile the same, so that it was safeguarded from destruction and tahrif like the revealed scriptures of the past.
Ibn al-Juzzi in at-Tashil and al-Zarakshi in al -Burhan [35] observe That during the time of the Holy Prophet (S) the Qur’an was scattered In the form of suhuf, loose pages and in the memories of the Companions. Some of them, like 'Uthman and 'Ali (A), even used to recite it in presence of the Holy Prophet (S). Al-Shaykh al-Mufid cites the statement in his tract, Ajwibat al-masa’il al-Sarawiyyah. [36]
From the foregoing account that 'Ali (A) collected and compiled the Qur’anic text in the order of its revelation, it is inferred that the 'short surahs, which are generally Meccan, were placed at the beginning "of the Qur’an, followed by the longer ones revealed at Madinah. Further, the context of revelation of the verses was also mentioned and the nasikh and mansukh verses were also specified.
Al-Ya’qubi in his Ta’rikh (Najaf, ii, 113) mentions the order of the surahs as arranged by 'Ali (A). Ibn al-Nadim, while discussing ‘Ali’s (A) codex in al-Fihrist, had left some empty space but apparently could’ not record the order of the surahs from the codex written by 'Ali (A) which he had seen. This is in itself an evidence that the surahs were arranged differently by 'Ali (A).
Return to Menu
Codices Attributed to 'Ali (A):
The codex compiled by 'Ali (A) existed until the time of Ibn al Nad’im, i.e. the last decades of the 4th/10th century." As mentioned in al Fihrist, he saw this codex in the possession of Abu Ya’la Hamzah al-Hasani and it remained as a legacy in the family of al-'Imam al Hasan (A). [38] Probably, the aforementioned person is al-Sharif Abu Ya’la - Hamzah ibn Zayd ibn al-Husayn al-Hasani al-'Aftasi who was a disciple of al-Sayyid al-Murtada. [39] Considering that al-Fihrist was written in the year 377/987 and al-Sayyid al-Murtada was probably born in 355/966, Abu Ya’la’s meeting with Ibn al-Nadim must have preceded his discipleship of al Sayyid al Murtada for it is unlikely that Abu Ya’la may have become the Sayyid’s pupil before the latter had reached the age of 22 years.
Re: ravage and Ali's alleged compilation
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Al-Muthanna: *
Assalamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda,
as promised here is the challenge:
.. and thus what we have today is that compilation.
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda
[/QUOTE]
btw, you added this claim, this is something I did not make.
What I did say was that we know that we follow the correct Quran because Hazrat Ali compiled a Quran, as did a number of our Imams, and content wise, though not in ordering, it is the same as other codices.
We believe it is not possible for anyone to challenge Allah's guarantee on the integrity of the Quran. Hazrat Ali's compilation, in that time of turmoil, ensured that there was one, authentic, complete copy of the Quran during the nascent stages.
goodnight and wassalam..
and i always thought that Usman bin Affan (ra) was the person who compiled the Quran… 
Assalamu 'ala man itaba'a al-Houda,
you copied a lot, but failed to address the challenge:
*Bring me a single narration from your books which says the Sahabah accepted Ali's compilation and thus what we have today is that compilation. *
Moreover if you have Ali's compilation, then why don't you follow it instead of following the one that you believe is out of order?
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a al-Houda
^ I think you misunderstood. Nobody says that Quran we have today is Ali's compilation. No it is not. ravage also does not say it.
Let me make it clear: The Quran we have today was compiled and put in present order during Hazrat Usman's times.
Hazrat Ali's compilation of Quran was not accepted. But Ali's compilation did not have any additional or deleted aayats. Only the order of aayats was different.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by 1010: *
^ I think you misunderstood. Nobody says that Quran we have today is Ali's compilation. No it is not. ravage also does not say it.
Let me make it clear: The Quran we have today was compiled and put in present order during Hazrat Usman's times.
Hazrat Ali's compilation of Quran was not accepted. But Ali's compilation did not have any additional or deleted aayats. Only the order of aayats was different.
[/QUOTE]
Interesting...
Order of ayah is very important in understanding quran ...changing the order may have wide effect on the interpretation on quran etc.....
Aur phir kehtay ho kay quran ko hum tehree shuda nahin mantay .....
bhai order main app kay khayal main changing ho gae to is ko he to tehreef kehtay hain ....
laholawalquwata
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by bao bihari: *
Interesting...
Order of ayah is very important in understanding quran ...changing the order may have wide effect on the interpretation on quran etc.....
Aur phir kehtay ho kay quran ko hum tehree shuda nahin mantay .....
bhai order main app kay khayal main changing ho gae to is ko he to tehreef kehtay hain ....
laholawalquwata
[/QUOTE]
:) are you sure about that.
Assalamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda,
[QUOTE]
^ I think you misunderstood. Nobody says that Quran we have today is Ali's compilation. No it is not. ravage also does not say it.
[/QUOTE]
Well, that's what ravage claimed at the very beginning:
[QUOTE]
we believe the Quran was transmitted, amongst others, by Hazrat Ali, and a number of our masoom Imaams. A number of such copies exist, and I've cited that before.
[/QUOTE]
To say that such copies exist, implies that we have them. Anyway, she has retracted that statement already.
Now you claim Ali's compilation existed for 400 years which we consider to be a a lie of course.
But then the question is why didn't the Rafida memorize it and copy it? And why wasn't it preserved by Allah (swt) since after all this is what you consider to be the right Quraan!
As for the claim that "only" the order was manipulated, then first of all all your narrations in your books contradict this claim, there is not a single narration which proves what you are claiming and how do you want to know this if you have never seen this alleged compilation? I challenge you to prove me wrong:
BRING A SINGLE NARRATION FROM YOUR BOOKS WHICH SAYS ONLY THE ORDER WAS MANIPULATED.
Apart from that, by this you are admitting that you believe in the manipulation of the Quraan. Imagine I take a Rafidi book and change the order of its sentences to turn it into a complete mess. What would that be called:
PRESERVATION OR MANIPULATION?
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda
Firstly, Im a he. Secondly, my bright friend, I didnt retract it. Note that I say and Imams. I also provided a link that has images and locations of existing copies of Qurans attributed to our Imams and Hazrat Ali.
You really need to read more carefully.
actually, you dont. The reference that I cite is a sunni reference. Read the link i posted.
we did, which is why is survived for so long.
you forget that shias were persecuted severely throughout history.
furthermore, the content of the Quran remains the same, so it does not matter much what codice you follow.
the order of the suras, and not the sentences.
You realise that at the time of the compilation of the Quran, a number of other sahabis also had their own compilations of it?
As this link clearly shows, there existed other codices at the time of compilation. Since Allah’s guarantee of its integrity existed since the time of its completion, do you believe that the existence of these variations/codices goes against his word of it?
If not, then Hazrat Ali’s compilation was also a valid form of the Quran, where the suras were ordered differently, but content wise, the same.
Assalamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda,
sorry I thought you were a she.
Anyway,
[QUOTE]
Secondly, my bright friend, I didnt retract it. Note that I say and Imams. I also provided a link that has images and locations of existing copies of Qurans attributed to our Imams and Hazrat Ali.
[/QUOTE]
Oh that's interesting. So you say we still have the compilations of the Imaams? Very good, please confirm I understood you correctly.
[QUOTE]
actually, you dont. The reference that I cite is a sunni reference. Read the link i posted.
[/QUOTE]
That book is beyond any doubt a Rafidi work. Please stick to the facts.
[QUOTE]
we did, which is why is survived for so long.
[/QUOTE]
The alleged Imaams' compilations?
[QUOTE]
the order of the suras, and not the sentences.
[/QUOTE]
Nope, I'm sorry to disappoint you. that's not what the Shiite encyclopedia and allmost all of your scholars say. Read this taken from the Shiite encyclopedia:
"Muslims agree that the VERSE (5:3) was among one of the
last revealed VERSES of Quran (but not the very last one), yet it is not toward the end of the present Quran. This clearly proves that although the Quran that we have available is complete, it is not in the order that has been revealed. These few MISPLACEMENTS were done by some companions on purpose at worst, or out of ignorance at least."
So again I ask you if I took a Rafidi book and changed the order of the sentences, how do you call that:
PRESERVATION OR MANIPULATION?
But even then, again I repeat my challenge:
BRING A SINGLE NARRATION FROM YOUR BOOKS WHICH SAYS ONLY THE ORDER WAS MANIPULATED.
[QUOTE]
You realise that at the time of the compilation of the Quran, a number of other sahabis also had their own compilations of it?
[/QUOTE]
Yes of course, and these compilations were not infallible since they were the result of personal Ijtihaad. That's why the Sahabah compiled the Quraan in a unprecedent manner to guerantee a 100% accuracy and burned all other compilations. But what is funny is the fact that you have to rely on this compilation of people whom you consider to be hypocrites, murderers, liars, rapers and so on. So our Quraan doesn't even pass your standards of an authentic Hadeeth!
[QUOTE]
Since Allah's guarantee of its integrity existed since the time of its completion, do you believe that the existence of these variations/codices goes against his word of it?
[/QUOTE]
We don't believe in the existence of these compilations at all. These are nothing but figments of your scholars.
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Al-Muthanna: *
Assalamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda,
Oh that's interesting. So you say we still have the compilations of the Imaams? Very good, please confirm I understood you correctly.
[/quote]
in museums/rawzas, yes.
[quote]
That book is beyond any doubt a Rafidi work. Please stick to the facts.
[/quote]
it cites sunni references. atleast i saw one in there. have you read through the article?
[quote]
Nope, I'm sorry to disappoint you. that's not what the Shiite encyclopedia and allmost all of your scholars say. Read this taken from the Shiite encyclopedia:
"Muslims agree that the VERSE (5:3) was among one of the
last revealed VERSES of Quran (but not the very last one), yet it is not toward the end of the present Quran. This clearly proves that although the Quran that we have available is complete, it is not in the order that has been revealed. These few MISPLACEMENTS were done by some companions on purpose at worst, or out of ignorance at least."
[/quote]
okay.
[quote]
Yes of course, and these compilations were not infallible since they were the result of personal Ijtihaad. That's why the Sahabah compiled the Quraan in a unprecedent manner to guerantee a 100% accuracy and burned all other compilations. But what is funny is the fact that you have to rely on this compilation of people whom you consider to be hypocrites, murderers, liars, rapers and so on. So our Quraan doesn't even pass your standards of an authentic Hadeeth!
We don't believe in the existence of these compilations at all. These are nothing but figments of your scholars.
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda
[/QUOTE]
you contradict yourself here. read that again.
Assalamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda,
[QUOTE]
in museums/rawzas, yes.
[/QUOTE]
good, now we have three different possibilities:
These compilations match the one we have 100%, meaning it uses the same alleged misplacements of the Sahabah. In that case you are accusing the Aimmah of misplacing verses which would go against the dogma of infallibility to say the least.
These compilations match Ali's alleged compilation. In this case it means you are prefering the Sahabah's compilation over this one and thus you are contradicting your Aimmah and following other people.
These compilations are nothing but poor fabrications attributed to the Aimmah and they are innocent from them.
Which one is it?
[QUOTE]
it cites sunni references. atleast i saw one in there. have you read through the article?
[/QUOTE]
Yeah I read it and I found it pretty worthless. Now where is the Sunni reference that prove we believe in these alleged compilations of the Aimmah?
[QUOTE]
you contradict yourself here. read that again.
[/QUOTE]
No, I consider things that are burned to be non-existent anymore. Do you disagree with that?
But still I'm waiting for you to answer this:
** I ask you if I took a Rafidi book and changed the order of the sentences, how do you call that:
PRESERVATION OR MANIPULATION?
But even then, again I repeat my challenge:
BRING A SINGLE NARRATION FROM YOUR BOOKS WHICH SAYS ONLY THE ORDER WAS MANIPULATED.**
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Al-Muthanna: *
good, now we have three different possibilities:
These compilations match the one we have 100%, meaning it uses the same alleged misplacements of the Sahabah. In that case you are accusing the Aimmah of misplacing verses which would go against the dogma of infallibility to say the least.
These compilations match Ali's alleged compilation. In this case it means you are prefering the Sahabah's compilation over this one and thus you are contradicting your Aimmah and following other people.
These compilations are nothing but poor fabrications attributed to the Aimmah and they are innocent from them.
[/quote]
I'd stay closer to somewhere between 1 and 2. They match 100 % the current Quran in content.
Since we do not commonly have access to Ali's compilation, nor are scholars agreed whether it exists anymore, and also since we know that content wise, they are infact the same, we follow the existing Quranic compilation.
You notice that marajii today consistently refer to Sunni translations of the Quran, simply because we hold the Quran to be the same.
[quote]
No, I consider things that are burned to be non-existent anymore. Do you disagree with that?
[/quote]
i ask you this. given that different versions existed, do you believe that contrary to Allah's guarantee of integrity?
Quran was complete during the lifetime of the prophet. was God's promise violated until the time you say the other codices were destroyed?
[quote]
** I ask you if I took a Rafidi book and changed the order of the sentences, how do you call that:
[/quote]
you tell me this. if the sahaba were the ones who agreed on the order, and that different people had different versions, what guarantee is there that the correct one was preserved.
simple: Allah.
[quote]
But even then, again I repeat my challenge:
BRING A SINGLE NARRATION FROM YOUR BOOKS WHICH SAYS ONLY THE ORDER WAS MANIPULATED.**
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda
[/QUOTE]
kindly stop repeating yourself.
we believe that the Quran is complete according to Allah's guarantee. We also believe that Ali compiled a version of the Quran, as did others. Since we have Allah's guarantee regarding the integrity of the completeness of the Quran, the only variations that can exist can only be minor ones, like chrnological ordering, baqara biqara, etc..
we'll have to pick this up later. i can see that you're still viewing the thread, and will probably be back with most of your thread header repasted :).
im off to sleep.
take care.
Assalamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda,
you didn't choose one of the three possibilities...
[QUOTE]
Since we do not commonly have access to Ali's compilation, nor are scholars agreed whether it exists anymore, and also since we know that content wise, they are infact the same, we follow the existing Quranic compilation.
[/QUOTE]
Why don't you have access to it anymore? Don't you believe you have the Imaam's compilation. There can be no difference between Ali's one and the one of the Aimmah if you believe they are both infallible.
So why don't you follow these alleged copies in your museums? Why are you relying on those who were compiled by murderers, liars, thieves, hypocrites according to your beliefs?
It seems you yourself don't believe these alleged copies are authentic. That's the only explanation.
[QUOTE]
You notice that marajii today consistently refer to Sunni translations of the Quran, simply because we hold the Quran to be the same.
[/QUOTE]
You don't consider it to be the same. How can a book whose sentences were misplaced be considered equal to one with the right order? It can't.
[QUOTE]
i ask you this. given that different versions existed, do you believe that contrary to Allah's guarantee of integrity?
[/QUOTE]
Of course not, because these compilations don't change the fact that the original was preserved and after all they were burned. So the only existent compilation is the right one by the noble Sahabah
[QUOTE]
Quran was complete during the lifetime of the prophet. was God's promise violated until the time you say the other codices were destroyed?
[/QUOTE]
No, because the people relied on their memory. The Quraan was preserved in its original form without any mistake in the memory of the people and in various scripts without any interruption.
[QUOTE]
if the sahaba were the ones who agreed on the order, and that different people had different versions, what guarantee is there that the correct one was preserved.
[/QUOTE]
The differences were simply the order of the suras and maybe some differences due to the 7 readings or spelling mistakes, that's it. But there is a consensus that the one that was finally compiled under Abu Bakr (ra) was 100% accurate, and the guerantee for this is the integrity of the companions whom we trust while you don't.
Because how do you know that Allah (swt) preserves His book? You will say, He says so in the Quraan. Then the question is, in which compilation? The one of the Sahabah! But if you don't trust them, then you cannot argue with the Quraan at all otherwise you would be using circular logic.
Apart from that don't forget that you don't understand the Quraan, you need the confirmation of an infallible that the Quraan is absolutely preserved by Allah (swt). But as a matter of fact such a confirmation doesn't exist in your books, but rather all narrations by your infallible state the contrary.
Needless to say that we consider these narrations to be fabrications, while your scholars claimed that they even had reached Tawatur and were on the same level of authenticity like the reports about the Imaamat (see Baqir Majlissi's Mir'aatul Uqul, Vol. 12, P. 525)
Therefore I must repeat my challenge:
BRING ME A SINGLE NARRATION FROM YOUR BOOKS WHICH SAYS ONLY THE ORDER WAS MANIPULATED.
And I'm still waiting to know:
**If I took a Rafidi book and changed the order of the sentences, how do you call that:
PRESERVATION OR MANIPULATION?**
up to now, you didn't answer.
wa salamu 'ala man itaba'a Al-Houda
Al-Musanna, you know what, people like you really are devoid of understading how to reason, devoid of logic.
The hatred you are showing spilling is nothing new. Everything is expected from you guys. You can even fight with Ali, curse him from after your prayers, kill Prophet's grandson, and make Prophet's daughters your prisoners. Your history is replete with such heroics.
You are only proving here that you belong to the party of Yazid laeen.
Anyway, so you say...
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Al-Muthanna: *
I ask you if I took a Rafidi book and **changed the order of the sentences*, how do you call that:
PRESERVATION OR MANIPULATION?
[/quote]
Musanna, this is exactly what was done in Usman's manuscript. Some aayats were put at places where they did not belong, so as to interpret them otherwise. But they failed because many ahadith still tell us why those aayats were revealed and who are the people referred to in them.
So what do you call such ordering, PRESERVATION OR MANIPULATION?
[quote]
But even then, again I repeat my challenge:
BRING A SINGLE NARRATION FROM YOUR BOOKS WHICH SAYS ONLY THE ORDER WAS MANIPULATED.**
[/QUOTE]
One of our books is Quran, and it says that Allah has taken responsibility of protecting Quran from addition or deletion. This should be enough proof for a Muslim, even if he is a Yazidi (read "Wahhabi").
BTW, you might also try to explain those ahadith from Bukhari which say that Quran is not complete, and is missing many verses. Do you want to see those ahadith?
*Originally posted by 1010: *
*The hatred you are showing spilling is nothing new. *
This sentence followed by...
*Everything is expected from you guys. *
Nice.. the ' You guys" bit is so classy
You can even fight with Ali, curse him from after your prayers, kill Prophet's grandson, and make Prophet's daughters your prisoners. Your history is replete with such heroics.
challo ji, one more thread where i dont need to waste my time.
10,
go and play somewhere else, this is too big for you. Please don't waste the webspace here.