Message of Thaqalayn Eight Questions from Six Scholars of the Qur'an

Message of Thaqalayn Eight Questions from Six Scholars of the Qur'an

Tanslated by I. RasuliVol. 2, Nos. 2 & 3

While reading the holy Qur'an we come across the names of certain nations, places and persons such as Dhul Qarnayn Dam, Ashab-e Kahf Cave, Dhat al-`Imad, etc. The question is that is it possible to locate these places in the present natural geography or they have gone under any changes? Can we take recourse to science and rely upon the scientific method in dealing with these Qur'anic names?

All the matters in this context were prepared in the form of questionnaire and were sent to some of researchers and connoisseurs. Among them Dr. Ahmad Ahmadi, Ayatullah Muhammad Hadi M`arifat, Baha al-Din Khorramshahi, Dr. Muhammad Husayn Ruhani, Dr. Abul Qasim Imami and Dr. `Abbas Zaryab Khoi have replied which is hereby presented to our readers. Hope the answers would be beneficial to the seekers of the Qur'anic learning.

Q.1- Are the historic places mentioned in the Qur'an in connection with the nations and events, available in the present natural geography in the same form or have they gone under any changes?

A- Ahmad Ahmadi: Some of the places might have been destroyed. The historical changes do not keep anything constant. Sometimes a riverbed changes or the sea advances or regresses. Abeskun island in the Caspian Sea, was a residential place once upon a time, where Khwarazm Shah had come from. It has now gone under the sea and there is no sign of it. Its name only has come in the history. We see some places which have earlier been at the coasts. Through, in the course of historical changes, a hill might have disappeared. Therefore, it cannot be said that the places mentioned in the Qur'an have remained in the same original forms.

A- Abul Qasim Imami : There are certain places related to the ancient tribes which has naturally been changed or disappeared. Except in some cases like the holy house of God (Bayt Allah al-Haram) and the related places or some other places which have relatively retained their previous states. Of course, before referring to the references which have computed these places, a prompt comment is not possible in this regard. In this connection a consultation with archeology organizations will be a good beginning in recognizing the relevant countries.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi: Whereas the Qur'an points to the ancient lands or geographical places such as Wadi Ayman, Madyan, Qura or Madain Lut, M'arib Dam which had probably been built against Al-Iram flood and so on, belonging to more than 15-20 centuries ago, their present locations are probably unknown and require archaeological researches. On the other hand, whatever is located or recognized will be quite different from what have been in the past. 15-20 centuries are enough for not only a city, but also a civilization to bloom or decline.

A- Muhammad Husayn Ruhani: A geographical site on this globe may not remain in the same place due to the following incidents:

a) An earthquake which is an underground product known as Ptate-tectonic bringing about deep changes in the superficial layer of the earth, demolishing surface of the earth easily in a short time.

b) Tides have great effects on the seas.

c) Human factor causes the increasing destruction of the crust of the earth.

d) Falls of such as snow, rain and hail, bring about destructive floods.

e) Soil erosion is a slow, constant and gradual process that ever changes the structure of the earth. This terminology has many applications throughout the present scientific geography.

I, as the editor-in-chief of the Great Islamic Encyclopedia(from 7-10-85 to 16-12-87) asked for a research grant from the management on the "Abeskun" article following researches of British Orientalist "Minorski" and Dr. Manoocher Setudeh. The fund was granted and days and days the geographers and researchers investigated on a boat in the Caspian Sea, but they did not find its exact location.

A- Muhammad Hadi M`arifat: The regions pointed by the Qur'an may have some trace today, such as M'arib dam, ruins of which are available today, even the valves and shutter used to close or open the dam are available. To study those cases, some scientific delegations (from Iran and abroad) visited the site and brought good information. They even could understand how the flood destroyed this dam. Another example is "Ahqaf" which are very soft sands is situated around `Adan, even today.

Some other regions have been referred to in the holy Qur'an and they were existing during the revelation of the Qur'an, such as the remnants of Lut's tribe (37: 137-138).

1- It is obvious that there has been something in front of them on the journey routes of Quraysh. I did not find anybody in the present era to follow this matter, which is worth following. One of the essential issues is follow up, the geographical regions of the history of Islam such as sites of the wars of Ahzab andKhandaq, or Uhud war. We have seen these places but are not reliable. A serious research is required to locate their real sites.

Q. 2- What is the objective of studying archaeological subjects of the Qur'an?

A- Ahmad Ahmadi: Many ancient historical and geographical regions have been mentioned in the stories of the holy Qur'an such the river or sea through which the Bani Israel passed, the land of Ashab-e Hijr, Dhul Qarnayn Dam, Ashab-e Kahf's Cave, earthy paradise of Dhat al-`Imad etc. Research on these and finding their traces is very effective in understanding the Qur'an. In addition, being involved in exploring the past would provide a good background to take lessons from the past on which the holy Qur'an in the following verses to persuade us to do so:

"Have they not travelled in the earth and seen how was the end of those before them? They were stronger than these in powers..." (30:9)

"Indeed there have been examples before you; Therefore travel in the earth..." (3:136)

"...Therefore travel in the land, then see what was the end of the rejecters." (16:36)

"Say: Travel in the earth, then see how was the end of the guilty." (27:69)

"But we will this day deliver you with your body that you may be a sign to those after you, and most surely the majority of the people are heedless of our communications." (10:92)

In this verse, the God's intention of bringing the body of Pharaoh out of water rather than leaving it decaying or being eaten by the sea animals is to give a lesson to future generations. As far as I remember Tantawi says: "The body of Pharaoh contemporaneous to Moses is now in a museum in Egypt."

Many of the existing problems in our national culture and literature need extensive archaeological research. In case of finding new information, our views will be changed about our culture and literature. For example, Alexander dam with its present condition has its effects on our literature stories and proverbs, and we can feel its position in our culture. Supposing that Alexander is the same Dhul Qarnayn of the Qur'an, he has been given a great status (like a prophet) and a poet like Nizami has written one of his complete poetical works in his name. When the archeology or the history proves it wrong that Alexander is not Dhul Qarnayn, our cultural views will change.

With respect to the importance of this subject, we suggested the Cultural Revolution Council in 1982 to include Qur'anic archeological studies in the educational curricula of the universities.

A- Abul Qasim Imami: The objective of archaeological endeavor is to work out the best method and necessary preparations for recognition of geographical places mentioned in the Qur'an and study condition of those people whose names in the Qur'an are associated with those places. Concluding that such studies are necessary for better understanding the Qur'an.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi: The objective of taking up archaeological subjects of the Qur'an is to understand the lessons pointed out by the Qur'an. As we intend to recognize Prophet Ibrahim (s), the father of prophets Sho`ayb, al-yas`a and Khidr in the stories of the Qur'an, likewise, for the same reasons and motives, we should try to understand geographical places of the Qur'an.

A- Muhammad Husayn Ruhani: In my opinion, "archaeological discussions" with its present meaning has not been dealt with in the Qur'an. There are many historical accounts in the Qur'an which are considered to be historical facts. Even the opponents in the Qur'an reproach themselves for the phrase "stories of the predecessors" is attributed to them . (6:25; 16:24; 8:31; 23:83; 25:5; 27:68; 46:17; 68:15; 83:13.)

All those are historical facts which signify the continuity, constancy and everlasting feature of the "divine order" on permeate in the individual, family, and social life of the people. These facts always give alarming to those who deviate from the right path. It seems that at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an, the word "history" did not exist in Arabic language and according to Dr. Muhammad Muhammadi this word was derived from the Persian word Mahrooz. There is a delicate probability of "story" or "stories" (Arabic from the branches of semitic mother tongue) to be taken from the words "histor, historia, histoire, history". This seems impossible. I was a member of a group working on "Ibdal" in Arabic, at the Academy of Iranian Languages, to trace the words and then to compare them with Indo-European mother tongue in order to extract the common root words. There were signs of common root.

It is not surprising to know that the main root of "history" is the Greek word "weid". Perhaps the Qur'an has used the word "stories" for history or report or a historical report.

A- Muhammad Hadi M`arifat: Historical problems have two important restrictions, i.e., they are bound by two things: one is "time", the other is "place". That means, a historian needs the exact time of a historical event to be able to study it. It has sometimes been noted that the historians study scientific and religious books to trace a geographical location. For instance, the palace of "Ibn Hubayrah" has been around Kufa. Finding location of an incident has vital importance for a historian, that means as the time is important for a historian, the place is more important. Perhaps the ancient historians were not giving much importance to the element of place, but the present historians give much importance to the place than time, and I am also of the same opinion. Many unclear historical problems and authenticity or untruth of a historical event can be proved by finding the place.

Q.3) What are the advantages or outcome of determining the sites and ancient positions of the stories of the Qur'an?

A- Abul Qasim Imami: Reaching at an accurate image of ancient places mentioned in the Qur'an, or specifying the geography of the Qur'anic accounts is naturally effective in understanding the verses of the Qur'an. It can clarify the lessons given in the Qur'anic accounts and makes their experimental values more evident. The advantages of every research is known after its completion. Whatever stated in advance cannot be the final conclusion. On the other hand, this depends on the nature of archaeological science as well as accuracy of their methods. It is to be pointed out that all, archeology itself is an important part of historical science, hence, with its potentialities it should be evaluated, taking into account its methods and data as well.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi: The advantages and outcomes of determining the geographical sites as referred to, directly or indirectly, in the Qur'an, is related to its objective which I clarified in the answer given to the earlier question. Moreover , these studies and the scientific outcomes would provide a better understanding of the holy Qur'an and the philosophy of particular history of the Qur'an. Ultimately, such studies will be at the service of the exegesis of the Qur'an.

A- Muhammad Husayn Ruhani: The advantages and outcomes of finding geographical sites and archaeological positions would help to develop a new understanding of the Qur'an, the necessity of which is felt.

A- `Abbas Zaryab Khoi: Recognition of the places mentioned in the Qur'an about the ancient nations and stories of the prophets is important from scientific, historical and geographical point of view, but it has a pure scientific aspect and is useful to satisfy ones curiosity. But the holy Qur'an is not for explanation of the history of nations. Its stories are lessons and examples. It will not harm the understanding of the Qur'an if the geographical sites are not traced except in cases like Hajj (pilgrimage) and understanding its rites.

The Europeans made various efforts in the 19th century to find unknown regions in Saudi Arabia and Palestine. They traversed throughout the Saudi territory by camel and horse and found many stones and inscriptions. They took away most of them and started finding their scripts and languages. It can be stated that they have discovered the history and geography of pre-Islamic areas. It is obvious that this work was performed for the sake of knowledge and information. For example, the purpose of reading Himayri or Thamudi scripts was not for unscientific or colonial aims, because colonization is possible without knowledge of Ma'rib dam or old cities of Yemen and Roab, and the colonizers are other than those who spend their days and nights in reading inscriptions and discovering their secrets. A number of books have been written in finding locations and ancient places of Saudi Arabia by Europeans. The list of these books and many other articles are in many volumes. In order to gain a very brief knowledge of this immense ocean, the multi-volume history book Arabs before Islam written by Dr. Jawad `Ali will be useful.

Q. 4) Is it possible to clear certain geographical sites in the Qur'an such as Adna al-`Ard, M'utafikat, al-`Udwah al-Duniya and al-`Udwah al-Quswa and Ashab-e Hijr, etc.?

A- Abul Qasim Imami: Although it is a very difficult task, losing hope is not fair.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi: In this regard, I should say that the work of science and research is to clear up the things which have been obscure prior to the investigation. The Muslim commentators and geographers acquainted with the Qur'anic culture and interested in its development and expansion have spared no effort in clearing up the geographical sites of the Qur'an such as Adnal `Ard (Shamat), Mutafikat (the village ofLut which according to some researches is under Bahr al-Mayyit), al-`Udwah al-Duniya and `Udwah Quswa (two hills or strategic points near Medina), or Babylon. Such attempts have reduced superstitions and increased the certainty.

A- Muhammad Husayn Ruhani: Yes, it is possible to clear up such uncertainty from geographical sites of the Qur'an.

A- Muhammad Hadi M`arifat: It is definitely possible. The present historians have cleared up these places. Today "Adna al-`Ard and al-`Udwah al-Duniya and Quswa in Badr war are known. The Ashab-e Hijr is Ahqaf. I have seen in some history books that the geographical route through which Imam Husayn travelled from Mecca to Karbala has been shown accurately, and this is valuable for us. The migration of Imam `Ali from Medina to Kufa, or the route that took the captives from Karbala to Damascus are clear and hence many questions have been answered.

Q. 5) What is the difference between archeology of the Qur'anic accounts and scientific interpretation of the verses? Does it have the same problem of scientific interpretation?

A- Ahmad Ahmadi: Scientific interpretations are always unstable due to the instability of the hypotheses and the theories adopted by the theoreticians. Since no hypothesis is the last one, every new invention requires a new theory for its interpretation or explanation. Therefore, scientific theories are subject to change. Like the Einstein's theory of relativity that changed the Newton's physics, the results of archaeological studies cannot be taken for granted to be the definite meaning. Of course, this possibility also helps us to solve some of the obscurities to some extent.

A- Abul Qasim Imami: The scientific interpretation, if accepted in the same term, is the adaptation of the meanings of some verses to the relative and variant data, and this is nothing but a superficial understanding of the Qur'an, because the knowledge has a new word or theory every time. But in archeology of the Qur'anic, accounts have a constant meaning and possess incomplete or sometimes complete existence outside. The work of archeology is to unveil the fact which once upon a time existed with its special position and has now changed or disappeared but has exactly been the subject matter of the Qur'anic verses. Perhaps, from this point of view, it can briefly be stated that archeology of the Qur'an is more tangible than some other subjects of revelation.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi: About the difference between archeology of the geography of the Qur'anic accounts and scientific interpretation, it should be stated that it is very close to the methods and attitudes of scientific interpretation. Naturally, it may bear the shortcomings of the scientific interpretation. A question may arise here as: if for example, all the Qur'anic geography researchers come to the conclusion that there has been no city or a region known as "Madyan" in ancient world and that this region is not compatible with the natural geography of the world in the past or present, then, what stand should be adopted and what comment should be made? It is against the shari`ah (religious law) to consider them as myth. For example, such an approach would affect the real historical fate and identity of the prophets like Moses and Sho`ayb (peace be upon them) and ultimately it reaches a point where the historic ruins and geography of the Qur'an are looked at in a mythical sense or as literary creation. This is obviously against the official creed of Islam.

Thus, if scientific researchers are determined that cities likeMadyan was not a historic or geographical fact, then scholars of the Qur'an cannot admit it for science deals with senses and natural objects, while religion is based on revelation, i.e. permanent realities which are beyond observation, experiment and natural facts. Certainty of faith and realities of the Qur'an should not be dealt with conjectures of the science.

A- `Abbas Zaryab Khoi = As we believe that the Qur'an is from God, the places and locations mentioned therein are relied to be real and if sometimes the geographical or archaeological discoveries fail to comply with them. Then, this will be regarded as drawback of the discoveries, because the archaeological researches and discoveries are not certain, but it is a science based on guess, but not a baseless guesses. It is a guess concluded from reasons such as guess concluded from rational principles and its usage in principle discussions. But the words of God are certain, so the guess and certainty are not equal. As a long time has passed from the revelation of the holy Book, therefore, many of the verses are of reasonable guess. Here the guess of the archaeological discoveries and the reasonable guess of the holy verses do not allow contradiction of those unconvincing discoveries with Qur'anic verses. In case discoveries help the certainty then we have to interpret and paraphrase the verses. This is specially true in cases like universe, skies and earth layers.

The science is attaining progress and perfection, but one in hundred thousands of the mankind's obscurities has not been unveiled, so the divine verses cannot be interpreted in conformity with the science for the apparent controversy with scientific data, because with new discoveries and invalidity of the previous scientific theories a new interpretation should be made for the Qur'an which is not advisable.

A- Muhammad Hadi Ma`rifat = Yes, it has drawbacks of scientific interpretations, because for example to find Dhul Qarnayn Dam it is possible to use the presently available scientific theories while they might have totally gone wrong.

Therefore, making use of archaeological science or geography to determine some locations cited in the Qur'an should be like the use of other sciences in understanding some of the verses. They may be used as the probabilities. Of course, some places like the M'arib Dam are definite and in these cases it cannot be said that the Qur'an was based on conjectures. Thus the Qur'an should not be based on sciences for the Qur'an and religious laws are fixed. It does not change by lapse of time unlike the science which is based on uncertain laws. It is not advisable to deal uncertain matters with certain ones. Except the fixed findings of the science such as the rotation of the earth around sun. Similarly the geographical regions are no exception, some discoveries are certain.

Q-6 Which sciences can be used to locate the geographical sites of the Qur'an?

A- Ahmad Ahmadi: A number of sciences can be used in finding geographical sites of the holy Qur'an, such as: History, archeology, including identification of scripts, stamps, coins, inscriptions, statues, tools instruments, and tombs, geography, sociology, and studying of the nations' characteristics.

A- Abul Qasim Imami = This question is related to the archeology experts who know the tools of their science better. Naturally, they would take help from the Qur'an and the science of history.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi = The sciences which can be used are: Historical geography, history, and archeology and their branches such as linguistics and etymology and so on.

A- Muhammad Husayn Ruhani = A book comprises 2,000 pages with about 1,000 satellite figures and cosmic maps and computerized tables is published under the title of Elements of Natural Geography written by Arthur N. Strahler (the greatest and most famous contemporary geographer ).I have translated this book into Persian. It is a very good book . This book could be used to understand the geographical places of the Qur'an.

Q-7 How much the knowledge of incidents and stories of the Qur'an can help the commentators of the Qur'an ? What are the demerits of ignoring such issues?

A- Ahmad Ahhmadi = a commentator of the holy Qur'an should explain and interpret the historical and geographical events, otherwise his writings cannot be called an interpretation. It only be the collection of others' writings and sayings which does not have research value. Therefore, a commentator of the Qur'an should provide his research on historical narrations and try to clarify the dark and obscure angles of his work with reference to geographical and archaeological sciences and carry out his researches with methodological analysis. For example, in some narrations the palace of Dhat al-`Imad was contrasted with fabulous and fanciful heaven of Shaddad. Whereas a commentator of the Qur'an should not confine to the narrations only, but he should deal with it accurately and comprehensively as the late scholar `Allamah Tabatabai did so.

A- Abul Qasim Imami = If a commentator of the Qur'an cut off from the real sources in dealing with the Qur'anic ancient places he would relapse into illusion.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi = Some points have been made on necessity and advantages of discovering the geographical sites mentioned in the Qur'an which is a part of the science of commentary. It is very obvious that every Muslim is eager to know as who were Jalut and Talut, likewise, it is very obvious that he likes to know where are the places mentioned in the Qur'an such as Madina, Qaryah or Bahr. Such need may lead to writing and compiling books on issues such as Dhul Qarnayn .

A- Muhammad Husayn Ruhani = For interpretation of the Qur'an it is necessary to identify the sites of the events as mentioned in the historical reports of the Qur'an. Not paying attention to this fact will grow into an undesirable result .

A- Muhammad Hadi Ma`rifat = The Qur'an has paid attention to the historical aspects as well . The battles of Islam against the infidels have been mentioned in the Qur'an - definitely have some obscure points for the commentators. If the historical places and figures could be cleared up with reference to time and place, it could enlighten even a faqih in certain issues, such as, the case of qasr prayer(prayer in shortened form). Or take the case of a figure like Dhul Qarnayn which has not been identified as to who is he? Where is the real site of the dam constructed by Dhul Qarnayn ?

Fakhr Razi was the first person who said that Dhul Qarnayn is the same Macedonian Alexander of Greece. His justification is: the Dhul Qarnayn mentioned in the Qur'an travelled to the east and the west achieving victories. Then Fakhr Razi says: "While a survey in the history we do not find anybody other than Macedonian Alexander, therefore, the Dhul Qarnayn is the same Macedonian Alexander. This is the logic of Imam Fakhr Razi: Since you did not find it therefore it is he. It means to infer a positive proposition from a non-existential proposition. We could not find anybody in the history with the specifications ofDhul Qarnayn as mentioned in the Qur'an. Since we could not find him, therefore Dhul Qarnayn should be Macedonian Alexander. Although it seems that Dhul Qarnayn belongs to ante historic periods, like some of the prophets. "The first people appeared on the earth were Dhul Qarnayn and Abraham, while according to the Old Testament, the Macedonian Alexander existed 800 years after the Prophet Abraham. This does not concur with the idea of Fakhr Razi. Recently Maulana Abulkalam Azad has compared Dhul Qarnayn with Cyrus and on the basis of the reasons and evidences cited in Old Testament, he claims that this personality has remained unknown to Muslims for being away from the Old Testament thus, while by referring to Old Testament it becomes obvious that Dhul Qarnayn is the same great Cyrus. This is a controversial statement, because it is said that when Cyrus conquered Babylon, he shook hand with a great idol called as "Mordoukh" to conciliate the nation of Babylon. While the Dhul Qarnayn as described by the Qur'an was a pure servants of God. Thus this idea contradict Abul Kalam's viewpoint.

One of the subjects is Dhul Qarnayn dam which has not been located and late Sayyid Hebat Allah Shahrestani compared it with China wall, while it is not in agreement with the Qur'an because Qur'an says: "That dam was made from molten iron and copper." Some others have thought that Dhul Qarnayndam is the same dam of Bab al-Abwab of Russia (i.e., present Turkmenian).

One of the other subjects is Nile Sea. Many of our commentators have cited it Nile Sea, while it is not a sea but the River Nile and Prophet Moses (s) did not cross the River Nile because he moved towards Palestine with his people. When he departed from Egypt and reached the land of Sina; The water that obstructed their way was the Red Ocean which is mentioned in both Old Testament and Samaat prayers as Sauf Sea which means Red Sea.

If our respected commentators had paid attention to the route travelled by Prophet Moses (s), they would not have committed mistake by diverting their mind to River Nile, because Nile is between Egypt and Africa, and Prophet Moses (s) did not want to go to Africa or Algeria. However, inattention to these places is misguiding in interpretation.

Q- 8 Does Qur'an use symbolic language in connection with the places or does it refer exactly to the natural historical sites as existed in the world?

A- Ahmad Ahhmadi = some Islamic sects have gone to extremes in paraphrasing the outer beings of certain verses. For instance, even they paraphrase zakat, prayers and Hajj (pilgrimage). By doing so the Qur'an which is the referral of all Muslims will lose its authenticity. Of course, in some cases it is allowed to touch the inner meanings of the verses by virtue of its own specific criteria, instance of which can be seen in Al-Mizan. Sometimes we come across certain hadith as see in a saying: "This is the inward meaning of Qur'an."

A- Abul Qasim Imami = It's too early to answer this question. This question should be postponed to a time that final stage of researches in the field of archeology have been carried out.

A- Baha al-Din Khorramshahi = Regarding the places cited by the Qur'an either in the stories or in symbolic way, my definite opinion as a Qur'an researcher and the translator of the Qur'an into Persian is that all the places pointed by the Qur'an are historical and real. Of course, it is possible to find some differences in the opinions of the commentators of the Qur'an for instance about Tur as to whether it is a proper mountain or is a mountain in general equal to Jabal or for example where was Wadi Iman or Aljanib al-Gharbi (i.e., west side), west as per which direction? Here it should be stated that differences of opinion among the scholars is a mercy and bring in its wake scientific progress. Moreover, it is a trimmed of the truth and uncompromising with dogmatistic approach but this should not lead into the denial of historical fact or doubt in reality of geographical places of the Qur'an.

At the end, I should add that I regard the Qur'an as linguistic - literary miracle, therefore, I regard usages of figurative, metaphoric, allusion, symbol and other linguistic and literary points, as definite inevitable, positive, desirable and even natural and obvious. It is very wise and acceptable when God, the Owner and main Speaker of the Qur'an uses figurative, speaking about a wall He says: "They found a wall about to collapse" (Kahf, Verse 77). It is not acceptable if one doubts the existence of a wall or city with a treasure under the wall .

A- Muhammad Husayn Ruhani = Name of not even a single place has come throughout the Qur'an symbolically.

A- Muhammad Hadi Ma`rifat = Regarding the Qur'anic accounts it is a question as to whether the stories are symbolic, or real. Some people have gone to extremes and dealt with them as unreal things. Some others have said: "The Qur'an is not other than the reality." In this context a middle way can be selected. Because the Qur'an itself says: "Surely Allah is not ashamed to set forth any parable-(that of) a gnat or any thing above that..."(1:26) .Now let us cite one example from the Qur'an: "Surely we offered the trust to the heavens and the earth..."(33:72)

Now can we say that God offered the trust which is wisdom to the heaven it and the heaven said: "I do not want." In fact this holy verse of the Qur'an reveals something on behalf. It means when we evaluate all the creatures, it is found that they do not deserve to enjoy wisdom. By evaluating human, it is found that he deserves wisdom. Therefore, accepting or rejection of wisdom depends on the nature of the creatures. Many such subjects exist in the Qur'an. Therefore, we can neither deny absolutely nor become absolutely positive. They must be evaluated case by case. Some cases are definitely symbolic and are the scenarios and at places they are absolutely real and many other things are still obscure. For example, the story ofAdam and Eve, heaven and Satan. The scholars definitely work on these subjects to find whether they are scenario or reality. Most of the scholars believe them to be realities. But it is also being spoken that this is also a scene. This means it is a secret and so is the mankind's nature. We do not want to believe it, but there is a croon. 

Tahrif al-Qur'an: A Study of Misconceptions Regarding Tahreef

The victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran appalled global unbelief and arrogance. As this revolution gained more and more momentum each day, the panic and fear of the unbelievers and the arrogance escalated.

In the beginning of the glorious Islamic Revolution of Iran, the criminal superpowers, who had divided the interests of the world among themselves, believed that they could subjugate and control this revolution and bring it into their own orbit, so that the Islamic Revolution of Iran would pose no threat to their interests.

However, these superpowers came to realize that this revolution is truly Islamic and aims at the revival of Islam not only in Iran but also all over the world, including Islamic and non-Islamic countries. They even realized that the long-term objective of this revolution is the liberation of all the oppressed people of the world from the yoke of the world-devouring colonialists.

The interest and eagerness that the Muslim people and the oppressed of all the world displayed toward this liberating revolution served to enhance the consternation of the colonialists and their devoted agents. For this very reason, they sought to confront this revolution. Every day they hatched plots to overwhelm the Islamic Revolution of Iran.

Their satanic conspiracies were channelled through the canals of politics and religion, in a manner that new ideas sprang up in their minds daily. By engineering these plots, they poured their poison into the newly-established roots of the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Among their most important political plots, one can name their numerous plans for coup d'etat, their fostering and bolstering of political grouplets both in Iran and abroad, their attempts to sow discord among the political and religious leaders, and tens of other intrigues, at the top of which should be considered the Iraqi-imposed war. This destructive war inflicted heavy losses on the lives and properties of the people. The enormous expenses of this war could have been used to improve the conditions of the poor and destitute Muslims of Islamic countries, especially in areas such as Africa and the like.

The conspiracies channelled through religion have not been less important and weaker than their political schemes. In this regard, one of the most important and tried ploy of theirs was to revive the differences between the Sunnis and the Shi'ah. As the overwhelming majority of the Muslim people of Iran unanimously follow the school of thought of the Ahl al-Bayt (A) (the members of the Household of the Holy Prophet-peace be upon them all), the superpowers tried to isolate this vast majority of Muslims from the Islamic Ummah in order to brand this Islamic Revolution as a sectarian revolution. The mercenary mullas, the hirelings who laud the reactionary regimes ruling over Islamic countries, played the most crucial role in this regard. These mercenaries rendered the best services to internationalkufr (infidelity) and arrogance by means of instigating Islamic sects against Shi'ism and by reviving age-old differences which have always served the tactics of the colonialists. They have done so under the name of Islam and sympathizing with Islam.

In the meantime, the Wahhabis, who are, at present, ruling over the holy land of Hijaz and the principal base of Islam and al-Haramayn al-Sharifayn (the holy shrines at Mecca and Medina), have created more trouble than all others. Every day, they publish books and leaflets all over the world and in different languages which are full of falsehood, fabrications, and accusations against the teachings of the members of the Household of the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon them all).

Of course, it is not surprising that the Saudi Wahhabism, which has been sponsored by colonialism and is hated by all Islamic sects, and in whose condemnation Sunni `ulama' have written a large number of books, should embark on sowing discord and exciting sedition. This is because the Wahhabis safeguard the interests of the criminal United States in the region and have bartered Islam for kufr.

After the victory of the Islamic Revolution of Iran which resulted in cutting off the hands of foreigners and unbelievers, especially the U.S. imperialism, from this country and which led to the awakening and awareness of the Muslims all over the world, pitifully, these so called Islamic elements and rulers of Islamic countries, instead of cooperating with this revolution and turning to Islam and their nations, turned their backs on both and looked toward the global arrogance, thus initiating their stratagems against the Islamic Ummah by reliance on kufr. This point has been stressed by the Holy Qur'an where it says:

... and Allah will by no means glue the unbelievers a way against the believers. (4:141)

and the Qur'an also says:

They make their oaths a shelter, and thus turn away from Allah's way; surely evil is that which they do. (63:2)

In any case, the issue of tahrif of the Holy Qur'an was one of the issues on which they manoeuvred very much and spared no efforts in propagating all kinds of falsehood and fabrication in this connection. Without offering any rational proof, they attributed belief in tahrif of the Holy Qur'an to the Shi'ah. They believed that by doing so they could make the Muslims pessimistic toward the teachings of the school of thought of the Ahl al-Bayt (A).

These conspiracies prompted for the preparation of this article. Although the colonialists have always contrived to engage the Muslims in conflicts and to keep them busy with mutual polemics and debates with a view to rule over them. Since this matter has not been sufficiently dealt with in the form of short articles for public benefit, this article has been designed to enter into this discussion very briefly, so as to enlighten the minds of all Muslims. Of course, in this respect, detailed books have been written and comprehensive research has been conducted, to which those interested in investigations into this subject can refer for further information. Among the best books on this subject is"al-Bayan", written by Ayatullah al-`Uzma al-Sayyid Abu al-Qasim al-Khu'i. This book's discussion pertaining to absence oftahrif in the Holy Qur'an has been separately published in English.

Tahrif of the Qur'an as Viewed by Traditions:

For those who have a slight familiarity with the books of both sects concerning ahadith (traditions), that is, the Sihah of the Sunnis and the various compilations of the traditions of the Shi'ah, it is manifestly clear that there are numerous traditions on the changes in the Holy Qur'an. Perhaps the traditions on this issue included within the books of the Sunnis are more in number than those of the Shi'ah. Nevertheless, those who have bandied about this issue out of spite and not as an objective and unbiased scientific and scholarly discussion, have always avoided the slightest reference to the traditions included in the books belonging to the Sunnis. They have only zoomed their cameras upon few weak narrations given in the books by Shi'ah. These are the narrations that are not acceptable to the Shi'ah `Ulama' and based on these traditions, they have not issued their views and verdicts.

At this stage, before continuing the discussion, it is necessary to draw the attention of the readers to the fact that, from the viewpoint of Shi'ism, traditions related to the Holy Prophet (S) and Ahl al-Bayt (A) generally fall within one of the following four categories based on their degree of reliability:

1. Veracious (sahih)

2. Good (hasan )

3. Authentic (muwaththaq)

4. Weak (da'if)

This classification has been based on the types of narrators and transmitters of the traditions. This means that if a tradition possesses a veracious isnad and if it is narrated by truthful and trustworthy narrators possessing all other necessary conditions, it is correct and reliable and can be used by the `ulama' and the jurisprudents. Otherwise, in the absence of any one of the necessary requirements, the degree of the validity of the narration comes down until it becomes a "da'if" narration that cannot be considered and put to effect and that cannot serve as a document or proof for a view or verdict. As the books on ahadith comprise all kinds of traditions, one of the prerequisites for every `alim (theologian) and faqih (jurisprudent) in making judgements and issuing verdicts is to identify and distinguish the traditions in terms of their verity and untruth.

Therefore, upon seeing a tradition, even in a worthy Shiite book, one cannot judge what the view of the Shi'ah on such and such a subject is.

Keeping this in view, it becomes evident that by seeing traditions in Shiite books, whether in the four principal books such as al-Kafi , al Tahdhib , al-'Istibsar , and Man la yahduruhu al-faqih or in other books such as Wasa'il al-Shi`ah , Bihar al-'anwar , and others, one cannot ascribe to the Shiites a view and judgement based on their contents.

None of the few traditions concerning alterations in the HolyQur'an included within the aforesaid books possesses a veracious isnad; therefore, the Shiite `ulama' have not given attention to them. Similar traditions existing in authentic Sunni books have also been disregarded by the Sunni `ulama'. Some of these traditions have been included in the following sources:

Sahih al-Bukhari, vol. V, p. 35; vol. VI, pp. 211, 221.

Sahih Muslim, vol. II, p. 736; vol. III, p. 100; vol. IV, pp. 167-168.

Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol. V, pp. 131-133; vol. VI, p. 55; vol. VI, pp. 449-451.

For more information in this field, researchers can refer to the books such as al-'Itqan and al-Durr al-manthur both by al-Suyuti, al Masahif by Abu Dawud, Ruh al-ma`ani by al-'Alusi, and others.

In any case, such traditions in Shi'ah and Sunni books have not been used by the `ulama' of Islam and no attention has been paid to them.

Immunity of the Qur'an from Tahrif:

Now that the traditions on the alteration in the Qur'an included in the Shi'ah and Sunni books are not authentic, reference must be made to the Holy Qur'an itself where it explicitly says:

Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its preserver. (15:9)

Regarding this holy verse, the Shi'ah and Sunni `ulama' of Islam have indicated that the word dhikr (Reminder) refers to the Holy Qur'an and the word hifz (preserving) refers to the fact that Allah the Almighty will preserve the Holy Qur'an from any alteration and mutilation. Shaykh Abu 'Ali al-Tabarsi, a Shi'ah`alim of the olden times, has stated that this holy verse reflects the fact that the Qur'an is immune from any addition, loss, mutilation, and alteration. With respect to this holy verse, `Allamah Tabataba'i has stated:

... therefore, the Qur'an is a living and eternal Reminder which will never die and fall into oblivion. It is immune from any addition and loss. It is immune from and secure. against any alterations in form and style which could affect its character and role, that is, as, "the Reminder of Allah which expresses divine truth and knowledge". For this reason, the aforesaid verse indicates that the Divine Book has always been and will continue to be guarded against any mutilation and alteration.

In the book entitled al-Bayan, Ayatullah al-`Uzma al-Khu i states the following:

This verse is indicative of the fact that the Holy Qur'an is guarded against alteration (tahrif) and that the oppressors do not have the power ever to use it as a plaything.

From amongst the Sunni `ulama', al-Zamakhshari with regard to this verse states: "Allah is the preserver and protector of theQur'an against all addition, loss, corruption and alteration in all times. In contrast, the other Divine Books have not remained unaltered. The same verse is also a proof that the Holy Qur'anis the Book which has been revealed by Allah and has not been a compilation and production of human beings - because if that had been the case, like all similar books, it would have been certainly subjected to alteration and corruption.

Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi also states:

In this holy verse, hifz (preserving) means that the Qur'anis immune from and guarded against corruption, addition, and loss.

Here, we do not intend to point out the statements of the `ulama' of Islam in proof of absence of tahrif in the Holy Qur'an, for this will take much space. We only desire to make mention of the statements of a few great 'Ulama' of Islam (as an example) whose opinions are valid and valuable for the Muslims.

(3) The Care Exercised in Preserving the Text and Recording of the Holy Qur'an:

Among matters scrupulously observed by the Muslims are the calligraphy, comparison, and memorization of the Holy Qur'an. In addition to taking utmost care in calligraphy, words, letters, and the diacritical marks in the verses of the Holy Qur'an, the Muslims including Shi'ah and Sunnis have also written independent books on these issues, lest the slightest alteration should take place in the Holy Qur'an as a result of the lapse of time.

For this very reason, we can see that they have reckoned and recorded the total number of the verses of the Holy Qur'an, the number of words and letters, and even the total number of the dots used in the Holy Qur'an.

Some of the `ulama' of Islam have even counted the total number of the alphabetic letters which are contained in the HolyQur'an and have said:

The letter "Alif" has occurred 48,940 times; the letter "Ba"' (the second Arabic alphabetic letter) has occurred 11,420 times; and the letter "Ta "' (the third alphabetic letter) has occurred 1,404 times; and so on.

They have reckoned the total number of dots used in the HolyQur'an and recorded them as 1,520,030 in number.

The `ulama' of Islam have always demonstrated matchless precision in regard to the script of the Holy Qur'an. For example, as for the word ni'mah which can either be written by  or  of which are correct, the `ulama' of Islam have stated that the above mentioned word has occurred eleven times with the letter  and in the remaining instances with the letter . Refer to the following verses in which this word has been written with the letter  (2:231; 3:103; 5:11; 14:28 and 34; 16:72, 83, and 114; 31:31; 35:3; 52:29). The same word has been written with the letter  in the remaining verses such as in (2:211: 3:171 and 174; 5:7) and so on.

Also the word "likayla" connected  which can be written either in connected  or disconnectedform has occurred four times in connected form and, in other cases, in disconnected form. Refer to the following verses in which the word has occurred in connected form: (3:153; 22:5; 33:50; 57:23). However, the same word has been written in disconnected form in the following verses: (16:70; 33:37).

Similar precise calculations have been made by the `ulama' of Islam in the connected and disconnected forms of other words in the Holy Qur'an such as f'ima  min ma , bi'sa ma  in lam  , an la and so on.

Now it is to be seen whether with all this exactitude employed by the `ulama' of Islam in recording the Holy Qur'an from time immemorial till now, can one accuse a group of Muslims of the charge of making alterations in the Holy Qur'an and mutilating it or believing in its corruption?

(4) The Extant Holy Qur'an Available to the Shi'ah and the Sunnis:

Another interesting point is, have those who accuse the Shi'ah of believing in the tahrif of the Holy Qur'an ever tried to investigate the copies of Holy Qur'an printed by the Shi'ah in various countries of the world to find out whether they contain the slightest discrepancy with other editions of the Holy Qur'anor not? Which Qur'an contains these forged chapters and verses that are ascribed to the Shi`ah Qur'an? Which Qur'ancontained these that not a single person has ever seen them? Instead of spending so much time in finding a weak tradition or quotation in unauthentic books in a bid to accuse the Shi'ah of believing in the tahrif of the Holy Qur'an, wouldn't it have been better for the mercenary `ulama', who embark on sowing the seeds of discord among the Islamic Ummah, to obtain and see numerous copies of the Holy Qur'an of different editions printed by the Shi'ah to discover whether such an accusation is fair or not?

At present, the antiquated hand-written manuscripts of the HolyQur'an by the Shi'ah from the early days of Islam until now are kept in museums of Iran, Pakistan, Iraq, etc. Some of these manuscripts are, once in a while, precisely reprinted in the same form and exposed to public view. Those who entertain the slightest doubt concerning this matter can personally refer to these manuscripts.

In the museum of the Qur'an in the holy city of Mashhad, I have personally seen some copies of the Holy Qur'an written on parchment made of deer skin. The period of writing of these copies of Qur'an dates back to more than one thousand years. Some of them are attributed to Imam `Ali (A), al-'Imam al-Sajjad (the fourth Imam), and some others are attributed to other Imams, Shi'ah 'Ulama' and pious men. Similarly, in other museums and libraries, there are also some copies of the Qur'anwhich are very ancient, but so far no one has been able to claim that even a single word of these manuscripts of the Qur'andiffers from what is now available to the Shi'ah and to the Muslims of the world.

Thus it is advisable for one to think realistically and not be influenced by these kind of propagandistic hue and cry and not to pay attention to the mental fabrications of malicious individuals and of those who attempt to disunite the people. We, certainly, do not believe that such propaganda will ever have any influence on the minds of the Muslims; however, this subject was worth mentioning lest some simple-minded people might be deceived by these futile statements.

(5) At this stage, it is necessary to review the words and statements of the Shi'ah `ulama' from the beginning until now to unveil the ignorance and malice of some of the so-called 'ulama' of Islam who are nowadays sowing the seeds of discord among the Islamic Ummah through their poisonous writings.

Unfortunately, the celebrated personality of the Sunnis, Abu al Hasan 'Ali Nadwi, who claims to be the leader of the Muslims of India and who is one of the renowned Islamic writers, has explicitly claimed in his recent book called Islam and the Earliest Muslims: Two Conflicting Portraits, published in English, Arabic, Urdu, and Persian with wide circulation all over the world, that with the exception of four Shi'ah `ulama', all others maintain that the Qur'anic text has been mutilated. His exact statement in this regard on page 45 of the book is as follows:

They hold that the Qur'anic text was mutilated; there is almost a consensus among their scholars on this point.'

Then he says in footnote of the same page:

1. Only four Shiite doctors, Saduq, Sharif Murtaza, Abu J'afar Tusi and Abu 'Ali Tabrasi are exceptions to this agreed view of Shiite theologians. But some of them are reported to have recanted their views. Anyway, them is always a doubt that they might have expressed their opinion in favour of purity of the Qu'ran because of their accepted principle of taqaiyya or dissimulation of one's faith.

We see that following his claim, propagandistic publications run by consuming the funds of the treasury of the Muslims-which is nowadays controlled by the Wahhabis and others in the form of petro-dollars also publicize the same allegation in the farthest reaches of the world without conducting any research to confirm its veracity. As an example, a propagandistic publication issued in South Africa under the title of The Truth about Shi'ism, Part 2, states the following on page 20:

The truth about Shi'ism in relation to the Qur'an is summarized in the undermentioned facts.

1. Besides the difference of opinion of only four Shiah theologians in all the centuries of Shi'ism's history, all Shiah authorities unanimously proclaim that the Qur'an which we have in our possession is a fabricated Qur'an.

2. Even the four Shi'i theologians - i.e. four in the entire history of Shi'ism - who dissented with the teaching of Shi'ism in this regard, do not believe that those who reject the Qur'an are kafir. Thus, although all Shi'i authorities unanimously proclaim the belief of the fabrication of the Qur'an, these four dissenters accept all such deniers of the Qur'an to be Muslims. Thus, their dissent and difference are of no real significance. They remain Shiahs who treat lightly the Shi'i teaching of a fabricated Qur'an.

Now the following statements made by great Shi'ah `ulama' are quoted, in chronological order:

(1) Al-Fadl ibn Shadhan, one of the great Shi'ah 'ulama' of the third century of Hijrah, states the following in his book al-'Idahin rejecting some of his contemporary Sunni 'ulama's statements who, by relying on some traditions, believed in the corruption of the Holy Qur'an:

But those who, by quoting such traditions, hold that theQur'anic text has been corrupted, are definitely making a mistake.

(2) Abu Ja'far Mubammad ibn `All ibn Babawayh al-Qummi, known as al-Shaykh al-Saduq, (died 381/991), states the following in his book entitled al- 'I'tiqadat (Beliefs):

With respect to the Holy Qur'an which Allah Almighty has revealed to His Prophet Muhammad (S), we believe that this is that very Qur'an which is between the two covers and is in the possession of the people, and that there is not anything more than this. Whoever charges us with believing in excess, has lied.

(3) In reply to the questions of `Tarabulusiyyat', al-Sayyid al Murtada `All ibn al-Husayn al-Musawi al-`Alawi, (died 436/1044), states:

Knowledge and certainty on the validity of the narration of the Holy Qur'an are like the knowledge and certainty on the existence of countries, cities, famous historical events, popular books, and the poems compiled by the Arabs. This is because the specific regard and attention and the strong motive for the narration of the text of the Holy Qur'an and its upkeeping had been much stronger than the precision and attention given to the above-cited items .... During the time of the Messenger of Allah (S), the Holy Qur'an had been a compiled collection exactly as it is now. The Holy Prophet (S) had even charged a group of his Companions with the responsibility of memorizing and safeguarding the Holy Qur'an. At that time, it was customary for the people to recite the HolyQur'an before the Holy Prophet (S) to ensure the accuracy of the text. The Holy Prophet (S), too, listened to their recitation. A group of the Companions, such as `Abd Allah ibn Mas'ud, Ubayy ibn Ka'b, and others read the whole text of the Holy Qur'an several times in the presence of the Holy Prophet (S).

With a little attention, one comes to realize that all these matters indicate that the Holy Qur'an has been a compiled collection. No one takes into account the opponents of this belief, be they from Imamiyyah (Twelver Shi'ah or Hashwiyyah, for their view is derived from a group of akhbariyyun (or ashab al-hadith, i.e., followers of the traditions) who had narrated weakahadith on the subject, thinking that they had related reliable and valid ahadith. Whereas such weak ahadithhave no power to challenge something based on definitive knowledge and certainty.

(4) Shaykh al-Ta'ifah Abu Ja'far Mubammad ibn al-Hasan al-Tusi d. 460/1067), states:

The remarks about addition and loss in the Qur'anic text are not worthy of respect the Holy Qur'an possesses; as (meaning that the text of the Holy Qur'an is today more than what it was before), there is a consensus among the `ulama' regarding the invalidity of this matter.

Regarding the deficiency of the Holy Qur'an (meaning that some parts of the Qur'anic text have been deleted), apparently the consensus of the Muslim sects also proves the contrary. The same holds true in our school of faith. This is exactly the belief that has been confirmed and proven by al-Sayyid al Murtada (may Allah be pleased with him). This belief has been clearly expressed in the narrations and traditions.

However, there are a number of traditions from the Shi'ah and Sunnis concerning the deficiency of many verses of the Holy Qur'an and regarding the interchange of some of the verses. All these traditions are "akhbar al-'ahad",i.e. traditions which are not mutawatir and cannot cause certainty. Thus, one should turn away and keep away from these sorts of ahadith and should not engage oneself in them. Moreover, these traditions are paraphrasable; had these traditions been correct, they would not have marred the Holy Qur'an which is presently available between the two covers, because knowledge and certainty prove the validity of this Qur'anand no one from among the Islamic Ummah has any objection to or complaint against it, nor does anyone reject it.

(5) Al-Shaykh Abu `Ali al-Tabarsi, who passed away in 548/1153, states the following in the tafsir entitled Majma` al-bayan:

There is a consensus and unanimity among the Muslims that there is not any `excess' in the Holy Qur'an. But with regard to the deficiency of the text of the Holy Qur'an, a group of Imamiyyah and a group of Hashwiyyah who are Sunnis have said that there are alterations and deficiencies in the Holy Qur'an, but the true belief accepted by the Imamiyyah holds otherwise.

(6) Al-Sayyid Ibn Tawus, (died 664/1265), states the following in the book called Sa`d al-su `ud

In truth, the Imamiyyah believe in the absence of tahrif in the Holy Qur'an.

Then, in the refutation of some Sunnis who maintain that theQur'anic text has been corrupted, he states:

I am surprised at those who, while believing that the HolyQur'an has been preserved by the Messenger of Allah (S) and has been compiled by the Prophet (S) himself, have narrated the differences of the people of Makkah and at-Madinah and of the people of Kufah and Basrah. They have also believed that ("In the Name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful) is not an integral part of the surahs (chapters) of the HolyQur'an. It is more surprising that they have reasoned that if  ("In the Name of Allah...") had been an integral part of the surah, then it could have been preceded by something else also. Surprisingly enough! When it is believed that the Holy Qur'an is immune from and guarded against any excess and deficiency, and when such a belief is supported by man's wisdom and by religion, how could it be said that what had been revealed before the surahs has not been included as a part of the Holy Qur'an? Is such a thing possible?"

These were opinions of the great Shi'ah `ulama' of the past whose statements are authentic and valid for all other `ulama' of the subsequent centuries. Thus, there is no necessity to lengthen the discussion and to quote the statements made by the `ulama' of the subsequent centuries. Hereunder, it will only suffice to mention their names along with the titles of their books in which this discussion has been incorporated.

(7) Al-Muhaqqiq Zayn al-Din al-Bayadi (died in 877/1472), inal Sirat al-mustaqim.

(8) Muhammad Baha' al-Din al-`Amili, known as al-Shaykh al-Baha'i (died in 1031/1622), quoted in tafsir Ala' al-Rahman.

(9) Mulla Muhsin, known as Fayd al-Kashani (died in 1091/1680), in tafsir al-Safi

(10) Al-Shaykh Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Hurr al-`Amili (died in 1104/1692), in his treatise entitled Risalah fi ithbat `adam al-tahrif (a treatise on absence of corruption in theQur'an).

(9) Al-Qadi al-Sayyid Nur Allah al-Shushtari (d. 1019/1610), the contemporary of al-Shaykh al-Baha'i, quoted in Ala' al-Rahman.

(12) Al-Sayyid Muhammad Mahdi ibn al-Sayyid Murtada al Tabataba'i, known as Bahr al-`Ulum (died in 1212/1797), inFawa'id al-'usul.

(13) Al-Shaykh Ja'far ibn al-Shaykh Khidr al-Janahi al-Najafi, known as Kashif al-Ghita' (died in 1228/1813), in Kashf al-ghita' `an mubhamat al-Shari`at al-gharra'.

(14) Al-Shaykh Muhammad Hasan ibn al-Mawla `Abd Allah al Mamaqani (died in 1323/1905), in Tanqih al-maqal.

(15) Al-Shaykh Muhammad Jawad al-Balaghi (died in 1352/1933), in Ala' al-Rahman.

(16) Mulla Fath Allah al-Kashini (died in 988/1588), in the commentary of Manhaj al-sadiqin.

(17) Mirza Hasan al-'Ashtiyani (died in 1319/1901), in Bahr al fawa'id.

(18) Ayatullah Sayyid Husayn Kuhkamari (died in 1299/1882), in Bushra al-wusul ila `ilm al-'usul.

(19) Al-Sayyid `Abd al-Husayn Sharaf al-Din al-Musawi al-`Amili (died in 1377/1957), in Ajwibat masa'il Musa Jar Allah.

(20) Ayatullah al-`Uzma al-Sayyid Abu al-Qasim al-Khu'i, contemporary, in al-Bayan.

These were the names of the great Shi'ah ulama' who wrote books confirming the absence of any kind of tahrif in the text of the Holy Qur'an. Surely, there may be comments by other `ulama' whose books are presently not within our reach.

It should be also noted that making mention of the names of these `ulama' does not necessarily mean that the other `ulama' do not believe in this point. It rather means that since they had not compiled any books in this field, we could not quote their relevant views and opinions.

It is hoped that this brief paper would remove all doubts and accusations made on the teachings of the school of thought of the Ahl al-Bayt (A), and would serve as a basis for further investigations by the researchers and investigators.

Wa al-Salam `ala man ittaba`a al-Huda (and peace be on him who follows the guidance).

The Qur'an and the Nature of Life

Here we intend to carry out a Qur'anic study of the problem of life to find out the specific viewpoint of the Qur'an about life. In particular, we intend to study the view that the Qur'an takes of the relation between life and the supranatural world and Divine will.

The Noble Qur'an recurringly mentions life. In many of its verses, the coming to life of creatures, the different stages of life, the system involved in the creation of living creatures, the effects of life such as intelligence, consciousness, perception, hearing, sight, guidance, inspira tion, instinct and the like are mentioned as the `signs' indicative of Divine wisdom and design. Each of these constitutes an interesting subject in itself, but here we do not intend to discuss them.

One of the themes discussed by the Qur'an in relation to life is that life is in the hands of God; it is God Who gives and takes away life. By this, the Noble Qur'an means that life is not within the control of anyone except God; no one else can give life or take it away. The issue that we now intend to discuss is this.

In the Surat al Baqarah, the Qur'an quotes Abraham (A) as saying to a tyrant of his time:

My Lord is He Who gives life and causes to die. (2:258) 

In the Surat al Mulk, God is described in these words:

... He Who created death and life. (67:2)

There are many verses in the Qur'an which consider God as the sole giver of life (Muhyi) and death (Mumit), and the giving and taking away of life is directly attributed to God and considered His exclusive prerogative. Also, in the verses where some of the prophets are described as bringing the dead to life, the Qur’an is careful to point out that such a thing could occur only with God's permission (idhn). An example is verse 3:49 .

..a Messenger to the Children of Israel saying, "I have come to you with a sign from your Lord. I will create for you out of clay as the likeness of a bird, then I will breathe into it, and it will be a bird, by the leave of God. I will also heal the blind and the leper, and bring to life the dead, by the leave of God .... (3:49)

On the whole, it is one of the points of difference between the theists (ilahiyyun) and the materialists that whereas the theists consider the origin and source of life and its Creator as transcending matter, the materialists consider matter itself to be the creator of life. However, something which is significant in this regard is that there is a subtle but enormous difference between the logic of the Qur'an and the usual logic of the theists regarding the thesis that God is the creator of life. This subtle difference is another of the miraculous characteristics of this noble scripture. We believe that if theistic thinkers become familiar with this logic, they can, once for all, release themselves from the harassment of the materiaalists and also liberate those poor creatures too from the clutches of their fancies and error.

The Problem of Origin of Life

Ordinarily, when (theistic) thinkers want to relate the matter of life to God and Divine will, they bring up the problem of origin of life on the earth and the question regarding the cause of the first emergence of life. Conclusive scientific evidence indicates that life had a definite begin ning on the surface of the earth, that none of the various types of living creatures, including animals and plants, have always existed since eternity. This is because the earth itself has a limited age. Moreover, it was not in its estimated life of several million years always fit for life. We observe that each individual of a species is always born from another individual belonging to that species. Wheat comes from wheat, barley from barley, horse from horse, camel from camel, and man from man. It is not the practice of nature that an animal or plant, for instance, should come into existence from a mass of sheer dust. Always, the origin of a living creature is traceable to another living creature from which it separates in the form of a seed or sperm and grows in a suitable location.

Now, how did life start in the beginning and through what means? Does every one of these innumerable species end in an individual living creature that is the source of its particular species? If that is the case, how did that first creature come into existence, for nature seems to disallow the emergence of a living creature without a speed, sperm or something that should have separated from a living creature? Hence, (they point out), we must admit that an exception to the rule must have occurred. In other words, a miracle had occurred and the Divine hand had emerged from the hidden to create that first living creature.

Or is it possible that all these species. have had a single source and root, and are members of a family of species? On the basis of this hypothesis, too, we confront the same problem. That is, even if we suppose all the species to have been derived from a single unicellular organism, the same question emerges as to how that first living creature came into existence. Isn't it the case that science has proved that a living creature cannot come into existence except from another living creature? Hence, was there an exception to the rule and a miracle, in that the will of God interfered to create instantaneously a living cell?

It is here that the adherents of the materialist outlook are forced to put forward certain hypotheses which are incredible to themselves. The theists, on the contrary, consider it as an evidence for the existence of a creator and state that a supranatural power did interfere to create the first living creature, and that it was the will of God that led to its emergence. Such was the view of Darwin, who was personally a theist. After having solved the problem of the branching out of species for himself, he arrives at one or several living creatures who first emerged on the earth's surface without having been reproduced by another living creature. He says regarding them: `As for these, they came to life through the Divine breath.'

Crissy Morrisen, in the book "The Secret of Man's Creation", says in this regard:

Some say that the corpuscles of life escaped from one of the planets and after wandering in the atmosphere for ages and consecutive centuries descended on the earth's surface. Such a belief is not acceptable, because it is impossible that they should have survived the space's absolute cold, and even if, supposedly, they could survive that danger, the cosmic rays that are scattered in space would have destroyed them. Even if they could pass through this stage, they must have come down accidentally in a very favour able point such as oceanic depths, where several conditions existed simul taneously and a suitable environment was created for them. After all these problems, the question still arises about the origin of life and as to how it did emerge in other planets. Today it has been proved for certain that no environment however favourable and conducive to life can create it. Similarly, no kind of chemical synthesis or combination can create a life corpuscle. The problem of life still remains one of the unsolved problems of science.

Some say that a miniscule particle of matter, of a microscopic size, coagulat ing with a large number of particles of atomic size, disturbed their equilibrium and assumed the form of life through their inclusion and exclusion. Nonethe less, no one has claimed until now that he has produced life with the means of chemical action and reaction.

By this discussion Crissy Morrisen intends to prove that the hand of a creator is involved in the origin and beginning of life, because it cannot be explained by material or natural causes. Concerning the origins of man and the great metamorphosis that resulted in the emergence of an intelligent creature with an extraordinary capacity for discursive thought and a power that could create the sciences, he says: "The emergence of man as an intelligent and thoughtful creature is too profound to be considered an effect of material changes in which a creator's hand was not involved." This was a sample of the mode of thought and argument of this group in relation to life and the Divine will. There is no need to cite more or less similar statements of others that do not differ essentially from the passage quoted.

As we know, till now man has not been able, despite all his efforts, to produce with scientific means the substance that makes up the living creatures. For instance, he has been unable to produce with chemical substances an artificial wheat grain possessing the properties of a living grain, which may grow into a plant when sown and develop ears. Nor has he been able to produce artificially the sperm of an animal or man with the capacity to develop into an animal or man. Nevertheless, scientists have not ceased in their efforts, and as yet it has not become conclusively clear for them whether they would be able to do so in the future or if this matter lies beyond man's scientific and technical capacities.

This topic too, which relates to the future has, like the problem of the origin of life, created a controversy throughout the world. Inevitably, that group of theists who, with their above‑mentioned approach and logic, say that the creation of life is in the hands of God, are of the opinion that, in this question too, man's efforts in the field are bound to be fruitless. Since man has no control over life, which is exclusively subject to the Divine will, man cannot create life anytime at his will with the scientific and technical means at his disposal. The prophets who raised the dead were able to do so with the leave of God. It is not possible for anyone to perform such an act without the per­mission of God. And should anyone wan: to do such a thing with the leave of God, it would mean that such a man has joined the ranks of the prophets and performed a miracle, and, of course, God does not carry out a miracle except at the hands of His prophets and awliya.

This group of theists consider man's present incapacity in this regard as the proof of their claim. When they observe that man has produced wheat grains that do not differ in any way in their chemical composition from natural wheat but are devoid of the characteristics of life, they point out that that is because life depends exclusively on the will of God and the creation of life requires God's permission, which He does not give to anyone except His apostles.

We said that the Noble Qur'an explicitly affirms that life lies in the hands of God and that it negates the role of anyone else in the creation of life. However, the Qur'an never refers to the matter of the origin of the human species or the beginning of life in order to affirm this point. On the contrary, it points as evidence to the present empirical order and considers the current, ongoing system of life as the system of crea tion, becoming and development. But when it wishes to describe God's creatorhood in relation to life, it does not make recourse to the first day. In this respect, it makes no distinction between the first day and the subsequent days. Rather, it points to the present orderly changes of life as the changes of creation. For instance, in the blessed Surat alMu'minun it states:

We created man of an extraction of clay, then We set him, a drop, in a re ceptacle secure, then We created of the drop a clot, then We created of the clot a tissue, then We created of the tissue bones, then We garmented the bones in flesh; thereafter We produced him as another creature. So blessed be God, the fairest of creators! (23:12‑14)

This noble verse mentions the systematic transformation and changes that occur in the embryo and considers these developments as a developing series of creations. In the SuratNuh, it states:

What ails you, that you look not for majesty in God, seeing He created you by stages? (71:13‑14)

In the Surat al‑Zumar, it states:

He creates you in your mothers'wombs creation after creation in threefold shadows. (39:6)

In the Surat al Baqarah, it is stated:

How do you disbelieve in God, seeing you were dead and He gave you life, then He shall make you dead, then He shall give you life, then unto Him you shall be returned. (2:28)

In the Surat al Hajj, it states:

It is He Who gave you life, then He shall make you dead, then He shall give you life. (22:66)

There are many verses on this theme and all of them consider the pres ent current order as the system of creation. The splitting of the grain and the seed under the ground, the growth of plants and herbs, the greening of the trees in spring‑time ‑ all of these are mentioned as part of the ever‑new and perpetual Divine creativity. In no place does the Qur'an consider the role of Divine creativity and will in the creation of life as relating exclusively to the first man or the first living creature that emerged upon the earth's surface, or consider only that organism or grain as the creature of God and the product of the Divine will.

The Noble Qur’an also mentions the creation of Adam, but not for the purpose of affirming monotheism (tawhid), or for the sake of the argument that since Adam was the first man, that proves that creation did occur and that `God's hand emerged from its sleeve' to create human life. God's hand has never been concealed within a sleeve.

There is a strange point worthy of notice in this regard. The Qur’an makes use of the story of Adam to convey many teachings of a moral and educative character, such as: man's capacity for attaining to the station of God's vicegerency; his abundant capacity for knowledge; the angels' humility in front of knowledge; man's capacity for attaining superiority over the angels; the harm of greed, the harms of pride, the effects of sin in causing man's decline from the sublimest of stations; the role of penitence in man's salvation and his return to the station of proximity to God; warnings against the danger of misleading satanic insinuations, and the like. But it never relates the special and excep tional situation of Adam in his creation to the subject of tawhid and theology, for the objective behind its mention of Adam's story was a moral and educative one. It was not intended as an evidence in favour of tawhid. Moreover, it confines itself to mentioning Adam, and says nothing about how the life of the other animal species originated on the earth.

We have mentioned earlier the customary approach of the theists who when confronted with the absence of an explanation for the begin ning of life in the first living creature say, "It was the Divine breath which brought it into existence." But the Qur’an considers the life of other human beings also to be the result of the Divine breath, in the same way as it considers the life of Adam as being due to the Divine breath.

In one place the Qur’an relates God as saying to angels regarding Adam:

(And when thy Lord said to the angels `See, 'I am creating a mortal of clay of mud moulded.) When I have shaped him, and breathed My spirit in him, fall you down, bowing before him!" (16:28‑29)

In another place it says:

We created you, then We shaped you, then We said to the angel&‑ Bow yourselves to Adam.' (7:11)

It is clear that, in this verse, creation, the blowing of the Divine breath and the veneration of angels is ascribed to all human beings in general. The Qur'an states in the Sura Alif lam sajdah:

...Who has created all things well and He originated the creation of man out of clay, then He fashioned his progeny of an extraction of mean water, then He shaped it, and breathed His spirit in it. And He appointed for you hearing and sight, and heart; little thanks you show. (32:7‑9)

As pointed out by the exegetes and as indicated by the context itself, the pronoun in sawwahu (he shaped it) relates to sulalah(progeny), not to al‑'insan (man).

* * *

The Origin Life and The Divine Will

Here it is essential to discover the reason why ordinarily the theists refer to the origin and beginnings of life when relating life to the Divine will, and to discover as well the reason why the Noble Qur'an has never taken this path in its effort to affirm monotheism, consider ing as it does life and biological developments absolutely the direct result of God's will, without making any distinction whatsoever between the beginning of life and its continuation.

The truth is that this difference arises from a more fundamental difference between the logic of the Qur'an and all other approaches. It lies in this that a group of theists ordinarily see God from the negative, not the positive, aspect of their knowledge. That is, when faced with a failure to overcome something unknown, they bring in God. They always seek God amid the mass of things unknown to them. That is, they always go after things whose natural causes are unknown to them. When in a certain case they encounter something whose natural cause is unknown to them, they immediately proclaim: "This was brought into existence by God's will." Inevitably, the more the number of things whose natural causes are unknown to them, the more their evidence of God's existence, and the more the number of things known and ex plained, the lesser evidence they seem to have for God's existence. For a group of theologists and adherents of monotheism, the supranatural realm is a storehouse of their unknowns. Whenever they fail to under stand and know something and to discover its natural cause, they immediately relate it to the supranatural. They see the role of the supra natural as lying in, what appears to them as, exceptions to the natural order and violations of the course of nature. When they do not find a natural cause in a certain case, they substitute it with a supernatural one, unmindful of the fact that, firstly, the supranatural realm has its own order and law; secondly, they forget that if a cause takes the place of a material and natural cause, the substitute cause must itself be a material and natural cause on a par with matter and nature. It does not remain a supranatural cause. The natural and supranatural exist on separate planes and not the same plane. Neither a natural cause can take the place of a supranatural cause, nor a supranatural cause the place of a natural cause.

The Holy Qur'an never relies for the evidence of the existence of the One God on cases where the system of natural law and order appears to have been violated. It relies in this regard on cases whose preliminaries and natural causes are known to the people, and it cites this order itself as a testimony to God's existence.

In the case of life, the logic of the Qur'an rests on the view that life is absolutely an emanation (fayd) higher and above the horizon of the physical and the sensible. Whatever the character of the laws involved in it, its source lies on a plane higher than that of sensible matter. Hence, the developments of life are the developments of creation. From the viewpoint of this logic, it makes no difference whether life was created instantaneously, in a single moment, or in the form of a gradual evolu tion, with one creation following another.

This logic rests on the principles that sensible matter is essentially devoid of life and that life is a light and emanation that must come from a higher source. Hence the laws of life, whatever form they may have, are the same as the laws of creation.

The difference between the existential degrees and planes of matter and life is a scientific and proved principle. Should we want to discover the supranatural source of life through the difference of existential planes between matter and life, it has to be on the basis of the positive aspects of our knowledge, not its negative aspects. Thereby we would be searching for God in what is known to us, not in what is unknown to us. Then we would not be compelled to bring down the supranatural from its plane as a substitute for a natural cause that we may fail to dis­cover. Rather, we would assume that a natural cause is definitely in volved though the frontiers of scientific knowledge have not yet reached it.

Sadr al‑Muta'allihin (Mulls Sadra), in the part of his bookal‑'Asfar concerning the soul, severely attacks Fakhr al‑Din al‑Razi precisely for this reason. He says: "I am amazed at this man and the likes of him who, whenever they want to prove the doctrine of tawhid or some other religious doctrine, look for instances where the natural cause involved has not been recognized and where according to their belief the order of the world has been violated and laws have been broken."

Conclusion

From the body of verses cited above it can be inferred that creation is not an instantaneous process from the viewpoint of the Noble Qur'an. 

An animal or human being passes through various evolutionary stages and is always in the process of creation. Rather, basically, the world is always in the process of creation and in the state of perpetual coming into being.

There is an opposite viewpoint which considers creation to be something instantaneous. Whenever its proponents want to discuss the world's creation, they go after `the first moment' when the world was created and brought out from the cover of nothingness. They imagine that if they were not to make such an assumption, the world could no longer be regarded as a creation and as something that came into being. Similarly, whenever they want to discuss life as a Divine creation, they go after `the first moment' when life began.

This kind of thinking is peculiarly a Jewish one:

The Jews have said: 'God's hand is fettered'. Fettered are their hands, and they are cursed for what they have said. (5:64)

That mode of thinking about the relation of life to the Divine will that always goes back to the beginning of life in order to relate it to God's will is the offspring of this Jewish outlook. This Jewish outlook gradu ally became prevalent and has spread everywhere. Regrettably, Islamic theologans too come under its influence. However, as pointed out, the idea of a `first moment' is foreign to the teachings of the Noble Qur'an.

As indicated earlier, a problem that is discussed in our times is whether man would ever be capable of making a living organism. Would he, for instance, be able to make an artificial human spermatozoon which when deposited in the womb or some other suitable environment be able to develop into a complete human being? We said that a group of theists, whose mode of thinking concerning the relation of life to the Divine will always turns to cases of exception and the first beginnings of life, emphatically negates such a possibility. But on the basis of the teachings that we have received from the Qur’an, we may say, there is nothing that stands in the way of such a possibility. This matter needs elaboration and must be examined from two aspects.

Firstly, we must examine the amount of structural complexity of a living organism to see whether or not some day man would be able to discover all the secrets that go into the material composition of the parts of a cell and the natural law responsible for the emergence of a living cell. We cannot say anything from this aspect, for the issue lies outside the scope of our competence. This is what the experts in the field have said: "That which is more significant and higher than the creation of the earth, the planets of the solar system and the whole universe is the substance of the protoplasm."

Secondly, if man one day succeeds in discovering the law of crea tion of living organisms, in the same way as he has discovered the laws relating to other creatures, and discovers all the conditions and material constituents of living organisms, and succeeds in preparing substances exactly like those of living organisms, will that artificial being possess life? The answer is that it will definitely possess life, for it is impossible that the conditions for the existence of an emanation should exist completely without the realization of that emanation. Isn't it the case that the One, Self‑Sufficient and absolutely perfect Divine Essence is the absolute source of all emanations? Isn't the Necessary Being‑by Essence, necessary in all aspects and ways?

Here the doubt may possibly arise in some minds that if such be the case, what will become of the principle that life is exclusively in the hands of God and that others have no role in the giving and taking away of life? We said earlier that this is something acknowledged by the Noble Qur'an, and the answer to this question becomes clear after a review of what has been said. Should man attain such a capacity one day, all that he would have done is to be able to prepare the conditions of life, not the ability to create life. Man cannot give life, but he can complete the capacity of matter for receiving life. In other words, man is the agent of motion (fa`il‑e harakat) not the source of being.

Should man succeed in doing such a thing, surely he would have made an important achievement from the viewpoint of scientific dis covery. But from the viewpoint of a role in creation. of life his role would be the same as that of the parents in reproduction and procrea tion of offspring or of the peasant in creating life in wheat grains. In none of these cases is man the creator of life. All that he accomplishes is to prepare the conditions of a substance for receiving life. The Noble Qur'an has described this matter in the best possible manner in the blessed Surat al‑Waqi`ah:

Have you considered the' soil that you till? Do you yourselves make the plants grow or are We the one who makes them grow? (56:63‑64)

Have you considered the seed that you spill? Do you ‑ yourselves create it, or are We the creators? (56:58‑59)

As to the miracles performed by the prophets, their miraculous char acter lies in that man is incapable of performing such acts with his ordinary knowledge and power. The prophets too had not attained that knowledge and capacity through the ordinary means. An extraordinary power and knowledge that accompanied them had raised them over the plane of physical nature, which made it possible for them to become a source of such a prodigious performance. Should man one day succeed in this achievement (i.e. `artificial' creation of life), it would not mean that he has succeeded in doing something which the prophets did with the leave of God. The prophets used to give life and take it away with the leave of God. But if ordinary human beings some day attain such a capacity, that would be the capacity to prepare the conditions for life, in the same way as today they are capable of causing death by destroy ing the conditions of life, without possessing the capacity to take away life. The giving and taking of life will remain in God's hands even if man, through the discovery of the laws of emanation and withdrawal of life, prepares or destroys the capacities of a substance for possessing life.

We said that man cannot create life and that creation of life lies outside the scope of his capacities. The giving and withdrawal of life is in God's hands, although man can prepare the conditions necessary for life to exist.

This must not lead us to conclude that there is some kind of division of work: that there are some activities that pertain to man without pertaining to God and that there are other activities that per tain to God without pertaining to man. Our sole objective is delimitation of the scope of man's activity, not delimitation of God's acts. That which characterizes the Divine aspect is absolute freedom (itlaq) and absence of limits; the limits and bounds are from the side of the crea ture. This matter needs an elaborate treatment and I request the reader to refer to the fifth volume of Usul‑e falsafeh wa rawish‑e riyalism.

Zawahir al-Qur'an: The Authority of the Book's Literal Meanings

The author is one of the maraji (legal authorities) of the Shi'i world and one of the most eminent figures in the world of contemporary Islamic scholarship. The translation given here is that of two chapters from his work on Qur'anic exegesis, al-Bayan fi tafsir al-Qur'an : "hujjiyat zawahir al-Qur'an," (the authority of the Qur'anic zawahir), and "usul al-tafsir" (the principles of exegesis).

Two terms need to be understood in regard to the Qur'anic meaning: nusus (sing, nass) and zawahir (sing. zahir). By nusus ismeant those Quranic texts which are absolutely clear, being of a single meaning, about which there is no ambiguity whatsoever. The term zawahir refers to those meanings which are the most obvious, although the text may have another, less probable, meaning besides its apparent sense. Although zawahir has been translated here as 'literal meanings' which applies to nusus as well the difference between nusus and zawahir should be noted.

There is no doubt that the Prophet (S) did not innovate any special method for conveying his message; he spoke to the people by applying the modes of expression to which they were habit uated. He brought the Qur'an to them that they may understand it, contemplate over its verses, follow its commands and refrain from what it prohibits. This message often recurs in the verses of the Qur'an:

What, do they not contemplate over the Qur'an? Or is it that there are locks upon their hearts? (47:24)

Indeed we have struck for the people in this Qur'an every manner of simili tude; haply they will remember. (39:27)

Truly it is the revelation of the Lord of all Being, brought down by the Trust worthy Spirit upon thy heart in a clear Arabic language, that thou mayest be one of the warners. (26:192-195)

This is an exposition for mankind, and a guidance and admonition for the God-fearing. (3:138)

Thus have We made it easy on your tongue, that haply they may remember. (44:58)

And We have made the Qur'an easy for remembrance. Is there any one that will remember? (54:17)

And what, do they not contemplate over the Qur'an? And had it been from someone other than God, they would have found in it much inconsistency. (4:82)

Apart from these verses, there are other verses as well which prove the obligatoriness (wujub) of acting in accordance with the contents of the Qur'an and the necessity of accepting the literal meanings of its verses.

Following arguments prove the authoritativeness (hujjiyyah) of the literal meanings of the Qur'an as comprehended by the Arabs.

1. The Qur'an's revelation as a proof of prophethood and the Prophet's (S) challenge to all mankind to bring a single surah of its kind, both imply that the Arabs used to understand the literal meaning of the Qur'an. Had the Qur'an spoken in riddles, it wouldn't have been correct to challenge them regarding it, nor its miraculous character would have been proved to them, because they could not have understood it. It would have also contradicted the purpose for which the Qur'an was revealed and its invitation to mankind to believe in it.

2. There are ample traditions commanding adherence to `the two Weighty Things' (al-Thaqalayn, which are the Qur'an and the Ahl al Bayt,) that the Prophet (S) left behind for the Muslims. Here, evidently, the meaning of adhering to the Qur'an is to grasp its message and to act in accordance with it, and there is no other meaning apart from this.

3. There are mutawatir traditions (i.e. traditions narrated by so many different chains of transmission as to establish their authenticity beyond doubt) which order that traditions be checked against the Qur'an; those which contradict it should be rejected as invalid or false, as those whose acceptance is prohibited, because they are not the words of ( the Prophet [ S ] or) the Imams (A). These traditions categorically prove the canonical authority of the literal meanings of the Qur'an, i.e. the meanings as understood by the ordinary speakers of the language familiar with the literary (fasih)Arabic language. To this category also belong those traditions which order the correlation of contractual condi tions with the Qur'an and rejection of those opposing it.

4. The arguments of the Imams (A) regarding some rules of the Shari'ah, as well as other things, in which they have argued by applying the verses of the Qur'an. Following are some examples.

a. There is the exposition of al-'Imam al-Sadiq (A) when Zurarah questioned him, "How do you understand that mash, (the ritual wiping, of the head or the feet during wudu') of (only) a part of the head is required?" The Imam (A) replied, "From the ba'," in the verse 

b. Another example, is his prohibiting Hisham al-Dawaniqi from accepting a slanderer's report, because such a person is a fasiq(evildoer), and the Qur'an says:

If an ungodly (fasiq) person comes to you with a tiding, verify it... (49:6)

c. Among the arguments is his (A) warning a person who had prolonged his stay in the toilet to listen to prohibited music, on the excuse that he had not intentionally come for listening to it, by observ ing, "Have you not heard the words of God Almighty,

Surely the hearing and sight and the heart will all be questioned?" (17:36)

d. Another instance is the Imam's telling his (A) son, Isma'il, "When believers give evidence before you, endorse its verity," quoting as a proof the verse:

He (the Prophet (S) believes in God and believes the believers. (9:61)

e. Concerning the validity of a slave being a muhallil for a woman divorced thrice, he (A) observes: "He is considered (fit to be) a husband, and God Almighty says in the Qur'an:

... Unless she marries another husband .... (2:230)

f. Another such argument is where the Imam (A) observes that a triple divorcee will not become halal again (for the husband who di vorces her) through a temporary marriage (mut`ah), because God Almighty says:

Thus if he divorces her, there is no blame on the two if they reunite.(2:230)

And there is no divorce in mut`ah

g. Similarly, concerning a person who had tripped and lost a nail and then bandaged the toe, he (A) said: "A person's duty in this and other similar instances is known from the Qur'an, which declares:

God has not ordained any hardship for you in the religion. "(22:78)

Then he (A) said: "Perform the mash over it" (the bandage).

h. The Imam (A) brings proof regarding the permissibility of marriage with a certain woman by quoting this verse from the Qur'an:

And other than those mentioned (as prohibited) have been made halal for you. (4:24)

i. Of such arguments is the one of the Imam (A) concerning the invalidity of a slave's marriage, because the Qur'an says:

An owned slave having no authority over anything .... (16:75)

j. The Imam (A) cites the following verse from the Qur'an as a proof of the permissibility of (eating the flesh of) certain species of animals:

Say: I do not end in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat .... (6:45)

There are many other similar arguments of the Imams (A) that are based on Qur'anic verses, and these are scattered through the different chapters of fiqh and other subjects.

Arguments against the authority of the Zawahir

A group of traditionists have rejected the authority of the literal meanings of the Qur'an, refusing to act on them for following reasons.

1. The understanding of the Qur'an is limited to a selected few:

They argue that the ability to understand the Qur'an is limited to those who have been addressed by it. The protagonists of this view rely as their proof on a number of traditions concerning this issue, such as the mursal tradition of Shu`ayb ibn Anas narrated from al-'Imam al Sadiq (A), reporting that the Imam (A) said to Abu Hanifah:

"Are you the faqih of the people of Iraq?" He replied: "Yes, I am." The Imam (A) said: "On what basis do you pronounce your fatwafor them?" He replied: "On the basis of the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Prophet." The Imam said: "O Abu Hanifah, do you comprehend the Qur'an the way it should be comprehended, and do you recognize the nasikh and the mansukh?" He replied, "Yes." The Imam (A) said: "O Abu Hanifah, you certainly profess having knowledge! Woe to you! God has not kept this knowledge except with the people of the Book and they on whom it has been sent down (i.e. the Ahl al-Bayt). Woe to you! This knowledge is with none except the chosen of our Prophet's (S) progeny, and God has not bequeathed a word to you from His Book."

The following tradition is narrated by Zayd al-Shahham in this relation:

Qatadah visited Abu Ja'far (A) and the Imam (A) asked him: "Are you the faqih of the people of Basrah?" He replied: "This is what they think." The Imam (A) then said: "I have come to know that you expound (tufassiru) the Qur'an." He replied: "Yes, I do." (The tradition continues until where) the Imam (A) said:"O Qatadah, if you have expounded the Qur'an in accordance with your own views, then you have certainly perished and have also caused others to perish, and if you have expounded it in accordance with the views of others, then you have perished and have caused others to perish. Woe to you! No one knows the Qur'an except those who have been addressed by it."

Answer: The meaning of these and similar traditions is that the comprehension of the Qur'an mentioned in them implies comprehend ing it completely, knowing both its literal and hidden meanings, along with its nasikh and mansukh, and this is limited to those who have been addressed by it. The first tradition explicitly conveys this meaning. Thus the question asked in this tradition was about the full comprehen sion of the Qur'an and about differentiating between the nasikh and the mansukh. The Imam's (A) censure of Abu Hanifah was due to his claim of possessing that knowledge. As to the second tradition, it contains the word `tafsir' which means `unveiling' (kashf al-qina'), and therefore it does not include the acceptance of literal meanings, because they are not concealed so as to require unveiling. This is also borne out by the explicit traditions mentioned earlier that understanding of the Qur'an is not limited to the Infallible Imams (A). Moreover the Imam's statement in the mursal tradition (of Shu'ayb ibn Anas) in which he says(God Almighty has not bequeathed to you a word from His Book), also proves the same, for it means that God has chosen the Awsiya' (A) of His prophet (S) for inheriting the Qur'an, and this is the meaning of the verse.

Then We bequeathed the Book on those of Our servants We chose ....(35:32)

Therefore, the knowledge of the Qur'an's reality is exclusively with the Imams (A) and others do not have a share in it. This is the meaning of the mursal tradition (of Shu'ayb ibn Anas); otherwise, would it he reasonable to think that Abu Hanifah did not comprehend anything of the Qur'an including  and other similar other verses which are explicit in their meaning? There is really a very large number of traditions which prove that such complete knowledge is particular to the Imams (A), and some of them have been mentioned earlier.

2. The prohibition of tafsir bi al-ray:

It is argued that the acceptance of the Qur'an's meanings is tanta­mount to tafsir bi al-ray (interpreting the Qur'an according to subjec tive opinion), and there are mutawattir traditions, narrated both by Sunnis and Shi'ah, which forbid such a practice.

Answer: As said, `tafsir' implies unveiling, and this does not include the taking of literal meanings of the verses, because such a meaning is not something hidden that has to be uncovered. Moreover, even of we should consider this as tafsir, it is not tafsir bi al-ray for it to come in the purview of the mutawatir traditions forbidding it. On the contrary, it is a tafsir in accordance with the common usage of words. Therefore, one who, for example, translates a sermon ofNahj al-balaghah in accor dance with the ordinarily understood meanings of its words and by using the indications available in the sermon and outside it, his doing so will not be considered tafsir bi al-ray, and al-'Imam al-Sadiq (A) points this out when he says: "People have solely perished on account of the mutashabih,because they could not comprehend its meaning and reality, interpreting its meaning in accordance with their views and seeking thereby to relieve themselves of the need to ask the Awsiya', who could have informed them." It is probable that the meaning of tafsir bi al-ray is independence from referring to the Imams (A) in givingfatwa, although they are companions to the Qur'an in regard to the obligation of adherence to the two and as the ultimate authority.

Therefore, if a person acts in accordance with the general state­ments (al-`umum) of the Qur'an without accepting the views of the Imams (A) in determining and limiting (taqyid and takhsis) the jurisdic tion of these statements, it will be considered as tafsir bi al-ra'y. On the whole, the adoption of literal meanings after a due search for internal and external indications (qara'in) present in the Qur'an and the tradi tions, or for a rational proof, can not only be not considered tafsir bi al ra'y, it cannot be considered `tafsir' as such. As mentioned earlier, the aforementioned traditions indicate that the Qur'an should be referred to and acted upon, and it is evident that such reference implies the acceptance of its literal meanings. Accordingly, when the relevant traditions are reconciled,tafsir bi al-ray ought to be understood as implying something other than acting in accordance with the literal meanings.

3. The mystery of the meanings of the Qur'an:

It is said that the Qur'an contains sublime and mysterious mean ings and this quality of it is a hurdle in comprehending its meanings and fully grasping its import. To be certain, there are some books of the ancients whose meanings cannot be comprehended except by knowl edgeable experts; accordingly, how could the Qur'an, which contains all the knowledge regarding both the past and the future, be understood?

Answer: It is true that the Qur'an certainly contains the knowledge of the past and the future, and comprehending it from the Qur'an is doubt lessly restricted to the Ahl al-Bayt (A). However, this does not contra vene the fact that the Qur'an has literal meanings understandable by anyone acquainted with the Arabic language and its rules, which one may act upon once they become clear after due research for supporting indications.

4. The knowledge that the literal meaning is not intended:

It may be said that we know in a mujmal way (i.e. without know ing all the specific details) that there exist restrictive proofs(mukhassisat and muqayyidat) which limit the application of the general statements (`umumat and itlaqat) of the Qur'an. This means that some of its literal meanings are certainly not what are intended, for such general state ments have been restricted in their jurisdiction. However, those literal meanings which are not intended are not specifically known so as to enable us to confine us to those particular instances. As a result of this, all the literal meanings of the Qur'an and all its general statements become indistinct (mujmal)incidentally, though they are not in fact such essentially. Consequently, it is not valid to act according to them, as a measure of caution against acting in violation of the real (commands of God).

Answer: This mujmal knowledge (that there are some general statements whose literal meaning is not the intended one) can act as a hindrance to accepting all the literal meanings when one resolves to act in accordance with them without a due investigation regarding their real import. But after the mukallaf (a person responsible for his religious duties) investi gates and discovers such instances to the extent of gaining a mujmal knowledge of their presence in the Qur'an, the hindrance posed by the prior mujmal knowledge is removed, and it fails to have any effect. Thereupon, there remains no hindrance to acting upon the literal mean ings. The same thing is true of the Sunnah, where we also know that there are proofs which limit the jurisdiction of its general statements. Hence, had themujmal knowledge (regarding the zawahir of the Qur'an) been a hindrance in the way of accepting its literal meanings even after such knowledge is rendered ineffective, it would also be a hindrance in accepting the literal meanings of traditions. Not only that, it would stop us from applying the Rule of Bara'ah (the presumption of absence of duty) in situations where doubts concerning the presence of a duty (al-shubuhat al-hukmiyyah) arise in the obligatoriness(wujub) or imper amissibility (hurmah) of something. This because every mukallaf knows is a mujmal way the presence of compulsory duties in the Shari'ah, and this mujmal knowledge (in accordance with the reasoning of the oppo nents of zawahir) could result in applying caution (ihtiyat) in all doubt ful cases of duties pertaining to obligations and prohibitions. However, we know for certain that caution is not wajib in them. It is true that age group of traditionists have considered caution wajib in cases of doubts concerning the presence of prohibition (al-shubuhat al-tahrimiyyah) because they imagined that the traditions ordering restraint and caution prove restraint and caution in cases of al-shubuhat al-tahrimiyyah. But this opinion of theirs is not based on the mujmal knowledge warding the presence of compulsory duties in the Shari'ah, because if it were so they would have considered caution obligatory in case of doubt regarding the obligatoriness of something (al-shubuhat al-wujubiyyah) as well. However, as far as we know, no one has considered caution compulsory in such cases. The sole secret of caution not beingwajib in these and other similar instances is that mujmal knowledge is at times `dissolved' as a result of success in acquiring the knowledge (of specifics), and the dissolution of the mujmalknowledge renders it ineffective. For a further explanation, the reader should refer to our book ajwad al-taqrirat.

5. The prohibition of following the mutashabihat:

The opponents of acting on the zawahir point out that the Qur'anic `verses forbid the following of the mutashabihat. God Almighty says:

In it are muhkam (clear) verses which are the foundation of the Book, and other verses which are mutashabih. As for those in whose hearts is deviation, they follow its mutashabih (ambiguous) verses .... (3:7)

The term mutashabih also includes literal meanings or, at least, the possibility of its including literal meanings makes them incapable of being accepted as authority.

Answer: The word mutashabih has a perspicuous meaning, and there is no ambiguity or vagueness in it. It means a word having two or more meanings that stand in the same degree of nearness in relation to that word. Thus when such a word is used in a verse, the possibility arises that any one of these meanings may be actually intended. For this reason, it is wajib to observe restraint in giving a judgement in favour of any of the meanings unless there is an indication to specify it. Accordingly, a word having a single literal meaning is not considered mutashabih.

If we condescend to accept that the word mutashabih is itself ambiguous, and that there exists a possibility of its including literal meanings, our doing so does not prevent us from acting in accordance with the literal meanings. This is after the practice of rational persons (sirat al-`uqala) which sanctions the acceptance of the literal meaning of a speech or writing. Therefore, a sole possibility is incapable of pre venting this practice from being acted upon, for it requires a categorical proof in order to do so. Otherwise, this practice will undoubtedly be followed. For this reason, a master is able to prove his servant's fault if the latter acts against the literal meanings of the former's speech, and it is valid for the master to punish him for the violation. Similarly, the servant may justify himself vis-a-vis his master if he has acted in accor dance with the literal meaning of his master's words where it is opposed to his real intent. On the whole, this practice is followed in accepting the literal meanings, unless there exists a categorical proof against it.

6. The occurrence of tahrif in the Qur'an:

The occurrence of tahrif (textual corruption, or loss) in the Qur'an prevents us from accepting the literal meanings because a possibility of there being, alongside the literal meanings, helping indications determi ning their real intent exists, and these indications might have been lost due to tahrif

Answer: We reject the claim of occurrence of tahrif in the Qur'an, and have earlier presented our argument concerning it. There we said that the traditions commanding us to refer to the Qur'an are by themselves a proof negating tahrif. Even if we condescend to presume the occur rence of tahrif, we are obliged by these traditions to act in accordance with the Qur'an even after the presumption of occurrence of tahrif. The conclusion that follows from this discussion is that it is necessary to act on the literal meanings of the Qur'an; that the Qur'an is the basis of the Shari'ah; and that the narrated Sunnah will not be acted upon when it opposes the Qur'an.

The Methodology of Tafsir:

`Tafsir' means the elucidation of the intent of God Almighty in the Holy Qur'an. Therefore, it is neither permissible in this regard to rely on conjectures (zunun) or on one's preferences (istihsan), nor on anything whose validity has not been established by reason or the Shari'ah. This is because following conjectures and attributing anything to God without His permission is forbidden. God Almighty says:

Say: `Has God permitted you, or do you forge a lie against God?' (10:59)

And follow not that of which you have no knowledge. (17:36)

There are other such verses and traditions that forbid acting with out knowledge, and there are a sufficiently large (mustafidah) number of traditions from both Sunni and Shi'ah sources forbidding tafsir bi al-ray.

This makes it clear that it is not valid to follow the tafsir of any exegete, irrespective of his being rightful in his creed or otherwise, because it amounts to following conjecture, and conjecture is not a substitute for knowledge.

The Sources of Tafsir:

It is necessary for an exegete to: follow the literal meanings as understood by a linguistically competent Arab (and we have already explained that literal meanings are authoritative), or follow the dictates of sound reason, for reason is an inward authority in the same way as the Prophet (S) is an outward authority (hujjah), or follow the traditions established to have been narrated from the Mu'sumun (the Prophet [S], Fatimah [A] , and the Imams [A] ), because they are the authorities to be referred to in the religion (al-maraji` fi al-Din). The Prophet (S) declared the duty of making recourse to them when he said.

Verily, I am leaving behind two weighty things amongst you: the Book of God and my Family, my Ahl al-Bayt. If you hold on to them, you will never go astray after me. 

There is no doubt that the statements of the Imams (A) are established when narrated through a definite chain of transmission free from doubt. Similarly, there is no doubt that they are not proved when narrated by a weak (daif) chain which does not possess the require ments of credibility. Are their (A) statements proven through a chain creating presumption (tariq zanni) when supported by a definite proof (dalil qati)? The scholars differ in this regard.

A doubt is raised here concerning the authority of khabar al wahid(a tradition which is not mutawatir) narrated by trustworthy narrators from the Ma'sumun (A) regarding the tafsir of the Qur'an. The reason offered is that the implication, of the authority of khabar al-wahid, or some other proof (dalil) leading to presumption(zann), is that it is obligatory to follow it in a case when one is ignorant about the actual law as if the law were known for certain. Such an approach is applicable nowhere except in regard to a hadith concerning a law of the Shari'ah or a subject relating to such a law. This condition is at times not present in a khabar al-wahidnarrated from the Ma'sumun (A) in regard to tafsir (for such traditions may relate to subjects having no relation whatsoever with the laws of the Shari'ah, such as doctrines, historical events, etc.).

This objection is contrary to fact. It has been explained in discus­sions on usul al-fiqh that the meaning of the authority (hujjiyyah) of the proofs that bring only presumption (and not certainty) about the actual fact, is that such presumptive proofs have been made binding substitutes for definite proofs by the Lawgiver (this is called certainty through ta`abbud, i.e. in observance of Divine sanction). Thus, a channel whose credibility is approved by the Lawgiver's sanction is as good as a source resulting in certainty, despite the fact that it lacks the intrinsic capacity to produce certainty. Hence all the effects of certain knowledge will follow from this channel, and it will be as correct to report (regard ing non-legal matters) on its authority as it is correct to do so on the basis of actual knowledge; it will not be considered a statement without knowledge.

We are led to this conclusion by the practice prevalent among all reasonable persons ( `uqala'). Such persons consider a channel of approved credibility similar to actual knowledge, without making any difference between the effects of the rule. For instance, the possession, of a thing by someone is regarded as a proof of his ownership by the people, despite the fact that it can give rise only to presumption that the possessor is its owner, and they allow on its basis all the effects of ownership, and report without deserving any blame that he is the owner of that thing. And this common practice has not been disapproved by the Lawgiver.

Of course, it is true that a trustworthy tradition or any other credible channel should possess all the conditions of credibility. Among such conditions is that the tradition should not be of known falsity, because something known to be false cannot reasonably possess the marks of credibility or enjoy the Lawgiver's sanction. Therefore, those traditions which are contrary to consensus or definite Sunnah, or the Qur'an, or the dictates of sound reason, will certainly not be consi dered credible, although they may possess other requirements of credi bility. There is also no difference here between traditions relating to a rule of the Shari'ah and those relating to non-legal subjects.

The basis of this argument against the credibility of khabar al ­wahid is that however trustworthy a narrator may be, the tradition nar rated by him is not secure from being contrary to the truth, because there is at least a possibility of his having made a mistake, especially where there are a large number of links in the chain of transmission. Hence, it is necessary to have some grounds establishing credibility that remove such a possibility, making it as if non-existent. However, in the case of certainty about the falsity of a tradition, which is known to be contrary to the truth, such a certainty cannot be evaded on the basis of the Law giver's sanction(ta`abbud ), for the intrinsic quality of certainty is to reveal the truth and its validity is established as necessary by reason.

Therefore it is necessary to limit the grounds of the credibility ofkhabar al-wahid to those traditions which are not known to be false or contrary to the truth. The same rule applies to other reliable channels of information. This issue has a bearing upon many other issues of the kind, and on it are based replies to many doubts and criticisms. The reader should understand it well.

Limiting the Jurisdiction of the Qur'an by Khabar al-Wahid:

When the credibility of khabar al-wahid has been established by a definite proof (dalil qati), is it possible to limit the jurisdiction of the general statements of the Holy Qur'an by a khabar al-wahid? The pre valent (mashhur) view among the scholars considers it valid. A group of Sunni scholars opposes this view, and some of them reject it uncondi tionally. `Isa ibn Aban states: "If a general statement of the Qur'an has already been limited by a definite proof, it is valid to further limit it by a khabar al-wahid; otherwise it is not valid." Al-Karkhi states: "If the Book's general statement has been limited by a separate proof (dalil munfasil) it is valid to limit it further by akhabar al-wahid and not otherwise." Al-Qadi Abu Bakr has refrained from giving an opinion in this regard. 

We accept the prevalent view, and the ground for doing so is, thekhabar al-wahid as presumed enjoys definite credibility, and this implies that it is wajib to act according to it as long as there is no hindrance to doing so.

Doubts and Opinions:

The imagined hindrance to acting in accordance with khabar al­ wahid is not based on valid reasons. Some main objections and the replies to them are mentioned below.

1. It is argued that the Holy Qur'an is the word of God Almighty which has been revealed to His Noble Prophet (S); this is a definite fact and beyond doubt. However, a khabar al-wahid has no certainty of being in accordance with the truth, nor is there a guarantee of its con tents being the authentic word of the Ma'sum, because there is at least a possibility of the narrator's mistake. In the light of this, it is not reasonable to abandon a thing which is certain for a proof containing a possibility of error.

The reply to this is that although the authenticity of the Qur'an is definite, it is not certain whether its general statements represent the actual law. It is obligatory to act in accordance with the general statements because they are the literal meanings, and it is accepted as a reasonable practice not disapproved by the Lawgiver to follow literal imports. It is quite obvious that this common practice, which proves the authority of literal meanings, is limited to cases where there exists no indication (qarinah) contrary to the literal import, irrespective of whether the indication is attached (muttasil) to the general statement or is separate (munfasil) from it. Therefore, when there is an indication conflicting with the literal import, it is obligatory to forgo the literal meaning and to act in accordance with the indication. Hence there is no other alternative to limiting the general statements of the Qur'an by khabar al-wahid after a definite proof of its credibility. It means that the khabar al-wahid has originated from the Ma'sum, though its authen ticity is based on ta`abbud and not on fact. In other words, we may say, though the authenticity of the Qur'an is certain, we have only pre sumption regarding its real intent, and there is no reasonable impedi ment to forgoing a proof which gives presumption for another similar proof whose credibility is known for certain.

2. It is argued that authentic traditions of the Ma'sumun (A) com­mand us to compare the traditions with the Qur'an, and that those which oppose it should be discarded and not considered their word. A limiting tradition (al-khabar al-khass) conflicting with a general state ment of the Qur'an comes within the purview of such traditions; thus it becomes obligatory to discard it as unauthentic.

The reply to this is that, first, we should clarify the meaning of `contradiction' and `opposition.' Customary indications applied in comprehending the intent of the Qur'an are not considered by custom as opposing the Qur'an in any manner, and a limiting proof(al-dalil al khass) is an indication which elucidates the intent of a general proof. Two statements contradict each other when people are unable to under stand from them the intent of their speaker if both the statements come from him. On this basis, a limiting khabar al-wahid cannot be considered as contradicting a general statement of the Qur'an; rather, it elucidates its intent.

This is also further confirmed by our knowledge that a large num ber of traditions have been issued by the Ma'sumun (A) that limit the general statements of the Qur'an. Now, should this limiting be considered as contradiction to the Qur'an, the following words of the Ma'sumun (A) will be incorrect:

That which opposes the word of our Lord, has not been said by us. It is absurd or false.

This statement of them (A) proves that the limiting of the jurisdic tion of the general statements of the Qur'an does not involve any con­tradiction.

Furthermore, the Ma'sumun (A) have laid down agreement with the Qur'an of one of two contradicting traditions as a criterion for pre­ferring one of them to the other. This implies, that a tradition which is not in consonance with the literal general statements of the Qur'an is creditable in itself, for it is obvious that if this tradition were opposed to the Qur'an in a manner that reconciliation were impossible, it would fail to be credible in itself, and thereby leave no room for conflict and preference. Therefore, there is no alternative to accepting that the mean ing of a tradition's not being in consonance with the Qur'an is that it is possible to reconcile the two in an acceptable manner by limiting the general Qur'anic statements.

The conclusion is that a tradition limiting the general Qur'anic statements is in itself credible and it is necessary to act in accordance with it, except when it is faced with another tradition contradicting it.

3. It is argued that if it is valid to limit Qur'anic statements withkhabar al-wahid, it will also be valid to abrogate the Qur'an with it. But since to do so is certainly not valid, it follows that limiting the Qur'anic statements with it is also invalid. The basis of such a logical linkage is that abrogation (as explained in the chapter on naskh)means limiting the Qur'anic statements with respect to a specific period of time, which ends with the arrival of the abrogating proof(al-dalil al nasikh). Consequently the abrogation of a Qur'anic statement does not mean its actual annulment, but only a formal extrinsic abolition. The limiting of the jurisdiction of general Qur'anic laws in regard to the instances of its application is similar to limiting it to a particular period, both being forms of limitation. Therefore, if the first is valid, the second, too, would be valid.

The reply to this is that the difference between the two forms of limitation is the presence of, a definite consensus (al-'ijma` al-qati)pro hibiting the abrogation of general Qur'anic laws by khabar al-wahid and had it not been for this ijma`, the abrogation of Qur'anic statements by a trustworthy khabar al-wahid would have been as valid as the limiting of the general jurisdiction of Qur'anic statements. We have mentioned earlier that though the Qur'an enjoys definite authenticity of source (qati al-sanad), its actual import is not known for certain, and there is no impediment to forgoing it by accepting a khabar al-wahid whose credibility is definitely known.

It is to be noted that the above mentioned ijma` is not based on mere ta`abbud, but rests on a rational basis. This is because some matters are such that should they be true in external reality, they are bound to be widely reported (mutawatir), and if a matter of great significance is reported only by some, it is evidence of the falsity or error of the report. The proofs in favour of the reliability of khabar al-wahid do not apply to such reports. It is on this basis that we said that a text is not proved to be a part of the Qur'an on the basis of khabar al-wahid. For there is no doubt that the abrogation of the Qur'an is not an affair limited to a particular group of Muslims to the exclusion of others. Hence, had abrogation occurred, a very large number of traditions (akhbar mutawatirah) would have narrated it. Now, if a single tradi tion reports it, it will be the proof of its falsity or error. With this exposition, the difference between the limitation of the Qur'anic state ments by khabar al-wahid and the abrogation of them by such tradi tions becomes obvious, and the logical linkage claimed between the two is thereby refuted.