Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur'an?

آخـــر الـــمـــشـــاركــــات


مـواقـع شـقــيـقـة
شبكة الفرقان الإسلامية شبكة سبيل الإسلام شبكة كلمة سواء الدعوية منتديات حراس العقيدة
البشارة الإسلامية منتديات طريق الإيمان منتدى التوحيد مكتبة المهتدون
موقع الشيخ احمد ديدات تليفزيون الحقيقة شبكة برسوميات المرصد الإسلامي لمقاومة التنصير
غرفة الحوار الإسلامي المسيحي مكافح الشبهات شبكة الحقيقة الإسلامية موقع الدعوة الإسلامية
شبكة البهائية فى الميزان شبكة الأحمدية فى الميزان مركز براهين شبكة ضد الإلحاد

يرجى عدم تناول موضوعات سياسية حتى لا تتعرض العضوية للحظر

 

       

         

 

    

 

 

    

 

Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur'an?

Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur'an?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    181
    Gender
    Female
    Last Activity
    12-10-2014
    At
    11:19 PM

    Default Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur'an?

    Peace be upon you

    It had been claimed by Orientalists and Christian missionaries that al-Hajjaj was responsible for changing the some contents of the Qur'an. The scandal surrounding al-Hajjaj is apparently based on two different traditions, one Muslim and the other Christian. The Islamic source is Kitab al-Masahif of Ibn Abi Dawud where a report mentions that al-Hajjaj made eleven changes in `Uthman's mushaf. As for the Christian source, the prominent one is of exchange of letters between Ummayad Caliph `Umar II and the Byzantine Emperor Leo III. A less prominent writing is that of an apology attributed to `Abd al-Masih al-Kindi.
    We would begin by examining the report in Kitab al-Masahif of Ibn Abi Dawud, the problems with the interpretation of Orientalists and Christian missionaries, the authenticity of the report and the implication of the alleged changes made by al-Hajjaj. Followed by this would be the analysis of Christian polemical sources and their authenticity.
    The document is divided into following sub-headings:
    The Report In Kitab al-Masahif Of Ibn Abi Dawud*

    Hadith Criticism Of The Report: The Study of Isnad*

    Hadith Criticism Of The Report: The Study of Matn*

    *The Christian Polemical Sources: Letter Of Leo III & `Abd al-Masih al-Kindi

    Conclusions*

    To be continued....
    I believe it is time to go back to the Quran, and believe God, before a day comes when the messenger will complain to God, that the Muslims deserted the Quran,

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    181
    Gender
    Female
    Last Activity
    12-10-2014
    At
    11:19 PM

    Default

    The Report In Kitab al-Masahif Of Ibn Abi Dawud

    The report in Kitab al-Masahif of Ibn Abi Dawud says:



    The translation of the report is as follows:

    Section: What al-Hajjaj Had Changed in `Uthman's Mushaf?

    Quote
    Abu Bakr said that it was there in the book of my father that a man told; I asked my father, "Who was that man?". He said, "Abbad ibn Suhayb told us from Awf ibn Abi Jamila that al-Hajjaj bin Yusuf changed in `Uthman's mushaf 11 letters". He said in
    al-Baqarah (2:259) lam yatasanna wanzur without ha to lam yatasannah with ha.and in al-Ma'idah (5:48) shari`atan wa minhajan was changed to shir`atan wa minhajanand in Yunus (10:22) huwal-ladhi yunash-shirukum was changed to yusay-yirukumand in Yusuf (12:45) ana-atikum bita'wilihi was changed to ana onabbio'kum bita'wilihiand in Mu'minun (23:85-89) sayaquluna lillah....lillah....lillah he made the two last occurrences allah....allahand in al-Shu`ara in the story of Nuh (26:116) it was minal mukhrajina and in the story of Lut (26:167) it was minal marjumina. It was changed in the story of Nuh to minal marjumina and in the story of Lut to minal mukhrajinaand in al-Zukhruf (43:32) it was nahnu qasamna baynahum ma` ishahum and he changed it to ma`ishatahumand in al-ladhina kafaru (47:15) min ma`inn ghayri yasin was changed to min ma`inn ghayri asinand in al-Hadid (57:7) he changed fal-ladhina amanu minkum wat-taqaw lahum ajrun kabir to minkum wa anfaqu.and in "When the Sun is folded up" (81:24) wa ma huwa `ala-l-ghaybi bidhanin to bidanin




    In other words, the report says that al-Hajjaj made eleven changes in `Uthman's mushaf and these changes are documented.


    Instead of reading carefully what has been mentioned in the report, the Orientalists and missionaries have involved themselves in myth-making and taking it to almost delirious levels. Based on this report al-Hajjaj has been accused of "undertaking a completely new recension" or a "minor recension" or even changing the `Uthmanic recension of the Qur'an. Let us list them one by one.
    According to Arthur Jeffery, the action of al-Hajjaj resulted in an "entirely new recension of the Qur'an" and that al-Hajjaj ordered the "new copies of his text sent to the great metropolitan centres."
    When we come to examine the accounts of the activity of al-Hajjaj in this matter, however, we discover to our own surprise that the evidence points strongly to the fact that his work was not confined to fixing more precisely the text of the Qur'an by a set of points showing how it was to be read, but he seems to have made an entirely new recension of the Qur'an, having copies of his new text sent to the great metropolitan centres and ordering the destruction of earlier copies in existence there, much as `Uthman had done earlier. Moreover, this new text promulgated by al-Hajjaj seems to have undergone more or less extensive alterations.

    Obviously the report in Kitab al-Masahif does not say any such thing as what has been claimed by Jeffery. Taking a clue from Arthur Jeffery, a Christian apologist called Chad VanDixhoorn states:
    Others yet hold that the final form was not finally settled until the recension of al-Hajjaj b. Yusuf.

    The author of the article "The Qur'an" in the book Arabic Literature To The End Of The Ummayad Period prefers "a minor recension" instead of an "entirely new recension of the Qur'an". He conjectures:
    On the other hand we have the tradition in Ibn Abi-Da'ud that al-Hajjaj was responsible for eleven changes in the consonantal text. If this is so, he is responsible for a minor recension at least.

    According to the claim of missionary John Gilchrist
    During the caliphate of Abd al-Malik in the first century of Islam the governor of Iraq, al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, took steps to correct Uthman's text. He is said to have made eleven direct changes to the Qur'an text as it stood in its consonantal form, all of which are reflected in the Qur'an as it stands today.... The whole section continues to name each one of the amendments made by al-Hajjaj so that the Qur'an text as we have it today is not only the Uthmanic text but also a subsequent minor recension of it by the Iraqi governor.

    Gilchrist claims that the alleged changes made by al-Hajjaj, as seen in Kitab al-Masahif, were made to the "`Uthmanic text" and that it was a "minor recension". The Qur'an that we have today is a combination of "`Uthmanic text" and the"minor recension".
    That the "Qur'an of Uthman" has been altered is also championed by "Brother Mark". He says:
    The insistence that this was 'merely' altering the Qur'an of Uthman from one set of 'accepted readings'to another is little comfort to people who have been taught that NO CHANGES have ever occurred to the Qur'anic text.

    Similarly, the missionary Jochen Katz has fantasized the following about the changes that al-Hajjaj made to "Uthman's Koran":
    he gave himself the liberty to change several words of Caliph Uthman's Koran, which is an indication that he did not believe that the Koran was verbally inspired or was inscribed in a "tablet preserved".

    The next in the category are those missionaries whose statements can be called demented. According to Steven Masood, al-Hajjaj was "accused" of making eleven changes in the text (sorry, who accused whom!):

    Al-Hajjaj Ibn Yusaf (694-714), the viceroy of Iraq, is said to have directed the work. He was also accused of making changes in the text. Ibn Abi Dawood lists these amendments in considerable detail in the chapter Ma Ghaira al-Hajjaj fi Mushaf Usman - 'What was altered by al-Hajjaj in the Uthmanic text'.

    Another missionary in this category is Joseph Smith. He claims that the eleven "distinct" amendments that al-Hajjaj made were reduced to "seven readings"! We also know from Muslim tradition that the Uthmanic Qur'an had to be reviewed and amended to meet the Caliph's standard for a single approved text even after Uthman's death. This was carried out by al-Hajjaj, the governor of Kufa, who made eleven distinct amendments and corrections to the text, which were later reduced to seven readings.

    Summarizing, the report says that al-Hajjaj made eleven changes in `Uthman's mushaf. This has been mysteriously and mythically transformed as if al-Hajjaj "undertook a completely new recension" or a made "minor recension" or even completely changed the `Uthmanic recension of the Qur'an! Apart from such absurdities, neither the Orientalists nor the missionaries checked the authenticity of the report; a method frequently employed to supress the information and to attack the Qur'an. Let us now check the authenticity of this report mentioned in Ibn Abi Dawud's Kitab al-Masahif.

    I believe it is time to go back to the Quran, and believe God, before a day comes when the messenger will complain to God, that the Muslims deserted the Quran,

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    181
    Gender
    Female
    Last Activity
    12-10-2014
    At
    11:19 PM

    Default

    Hadith Criticism Of The Report: The Study of Isnad

    Hadith critics at first look at the isnad and if it is defective, they call the hadith defective, without scrutinizing the subject matter; because a hadith, according to their criteria, cannot be authnetic unless both its parts are correct. Using this criteria let us first study the isnad.

    The isnad of this report is Awf bin Abi Jamila `Abbad Ibn Suhayb Abu Bakr Father of Abu Bakr. Study of reliability of narrators in this isnad shows that `Abbad Ibn Suhayb is the one who had been declared weak and his hadith is rejected.
    Al-Bukhari very tersely says in his Du`afa al-Saghir:




    228 - `Abbad Ibn Suhayb al-Basri: Abandoned.

    Similarly al-Nasa'i says in his Du`afa wa-l-Matrukin:
    (411) `Abbad Ibn Suhayb al-Basri: His hadith is rejected (matruk al-hadith).

    Ibn Abi Hatim comments in his Kitab al-Jarh wa-l-Ta`dil:
    417 - `Abbad Ibn Suhayb al-Basri narrated from Isma`il Ibn Abi Khalid and Hisham Ibn `Urwah and the two Hijazis. Narrated from him people who did not understand the science. `Abd al-Rahman told us that `Abdullah Ibn Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Hanbal wrote to us: "I asked my father about `Abbad Ibn Suhayb." He said: "I saw him in Basra several times. The qadariyyah used to claim him." It was read to al-`Abbas Ibn Muhammad al-Duri from Yahya Ibn Ma`in that he mentioned `Abbad Ibn Suhayb and said that it was narrated from Abu Bakr Ibn Nafi` - and Abu Bakr Ibn Nafi` is a senior from whom Malik Ibn Anas narrated - that `Abd al-Rahman told us: My father told me: "`Ali Ibn al-Madini said: 'The hadith of `Abbad Ibn Suhayb is gone.'" `Abd al-Rahman told us, Hab Ibn Isma`il [al-Kirmani] wrote to me: "I heard Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Shaybah say: 'We forsook the hadith of `Abbad Ibn Suhayb twenty years before he demised.'" `Abd al-Rahman told us: "I asked my father about `Abbad Ibn Suhayb. He said: 'His hadith is weak (da`if). His hadith is disavowed (munkar). His hadith is forsaken.'

    Similarly Ibn Hibban says in Kitab al-Majruhin min al-Muhaddithin wa-l-Du`afa wa-l-Matrukin:
    `Abbad Ibn Suhayb: From Basra. He narrated from Hisham Ibn `Urwah and al-A`mash. The Iraqis narrated from him. He belonged to the qadariyyah and called to it. On the top of that, he narrated disavowed narrations from famous people, such narrations, if heard by a beginner in this field, he would deem them forged.

    It was narrated from Hisham Ibn `Urwah from his father from `A'ishah that the Prophet - peace be upon him - said: "Blue eyes are a blessing." Ibn `Ar`arah informed me of this narration in Nasibin saying: "Muhammad ibn Musa said on the authority of `Abbad Ibn Suhayb."

    It was narrated from Humayd al-Tawil that Anas said: "I entered at the Messenger of Allah - peace be upon him. There was a recipient full of water before him. He told me: 'Anas, come close to me so that I teach you how to perform wudu'.' I went close to him - peace be upon him. When he washed his hands, he said: 'In the name of Allah, praise to Allah, there is no power nor strength except in Allah'. Then when he performed the istinja', he said: 'O Allah, preserve my chastity and ease my affairs.' When he washed his mouth and nose, he said: 'O Allah, teach me my argument and do not deprive me from the scent of Paradise.' When he washed his face, he said: 'O Allah, make my face white on the day when the faces become white.' When he washed his arms, he said: 'O Allah, give me my book in the right hand.' When he wiped his head, he said: 'O Allah, overwhelm us with Your mercy and protect us from your punishment.' When he washed his feet, he said: 'O Allah, make my feet unshakable upon the day when the feet falter.' Then, the Prophet - peace be upon him - said: 'By the One Who sent me with the truth, Anas, whoever says the same in his wudu', from each drop that falls from his fingers, Allah creates an angel that praises him in seventy tongues, the reward of which lasts until the day of resurrection.'" This was narrated to us by Ya`qub Ibn Ishaq al-Qadi on the authority of Ahmad Ibn Hisham al-Khawarizmi, from him.




    Al-Dhahabi says in his Mizan al-I`tidal fi Naqd al-Rijal:
    4122 - `Abbad Ibn Suhayb, one of the abandoned. He narrated from Hisham Ibn `Urwah and al-A`mash. Ibn al-Madini said: "His hadith is gone." Al-Bukhari, al-Nasa'i and others said: "Abandoned." Ibn Hibban said: "He belonged to qadariyyah and called to it. On the top of that, he narrated disavowed narrations from famous people, such narrations, if heard by a beginner in this field, he would deem them forged."
    Muhammad Ibn Musa said, `Abbad Ibn Suhayb informed us on the authority of Hisham from his father from `A'ishah that the Prophet - peace be upon him - said: "Blue eyes are a blessing."A lengthy but fabricated hadith was narrated from Humayd on the authority of Anas concerning the wudu' from which we quote: "When he washed his face, he said: 'O Allah, make my face white...'" until he said: "'Anas, whoever says the same in his wudu', from each drop that falls from his fingers, Allah creates an angel that praises him in seventy tongues, the reward of which lasts until the day of resurrection.'" Narrated by Ibn Hibban on the authority of Ya`qub Ibn Ishaq [3/30] al-Qadi, from Ahmad Ibn Hisham al-Khawarizmi, from him.Al-Bukhari said in Kitab al-Du`afa' al-Kabir: `Abbad Ibn Suhayb died after year 200. He was forsaken, his hadith is abundant.

    Abu Dawud said: "He is truthful (saduq) and qadari". Ahmad said: "He was not a liar and had plenty of hadith. He heard from al-A`mash." Al-Kudaymi said: "I heard `Ali say: 'I forsook 100 thousand hadiths of mine, half of which come from `Abbad Ibn Suhayb'."

    Ahmad Ibn Rawh narrated from `Abbad 100,000 hadiths. Ibn `Adiyy said: "`Abbad Ibn Suhayb has many writings, and although he is weak, his hadith is written by Ibn Abi Dawud."

    Yahya Ibn `Abd al-Rahman told us: "I heard Yahya Ibn Ma`in say: '`Abbad Ibn Suhayb is more reliable than Abu `Asim al-Nabil.'" Abu Ishaq al-Sa`di said: "`Abbad Ibn Suhayb exaggerated in his innovation and disputed for his falsehoods




    ."

    Similar statements are made by Ibn Hajar in his Lisan al-Mizan. The bottomline here is that `Abbad Ibn Suhayb has been abandoned and his reports are rejected. The terms used to describe `Abbad Ibn Suhayb are the most severe possible [matruk al-hadith]. It is not correct to describe his narrations as 'weak', which is an understatement. Rather, his narrations are fabricated, pure and simple. He has reached the lowest levels of Jarh in the sciences dealing with al-Jarh wa 'l-Ta`dil ("The disparaging and declaring trustworthy") of the narrators.
    It is also clear that Ibn Abi Dawud wrote the hadith from `Abbad Ibn Suhayb even though the hadith scholars before and after Ibn Abi Dawud have considered the hadith from `Abbad Ibn Suhayb to be rejected. It is not that the Orientalists and the missionaries are unaware of this fact. Jeffery, whose book Materials For The History Of The Text Of The Qur'an: The Old Codices is often used by the Christian missionaries for polemical purposes to attack the Qur'an, clearly says:
    Much of the material given by Ibn Abi Dawud regarding the history of the text of the Qur'an, though extremely unorthodox, yet agrees so closely with the conclusions one had reached from quite other directions that one feels confident in making use of it, however weak orthodoxy may consider its isnads to be.

    Jeffery gives no reasons for is new found confidence. Commenting on Jeffery's attainment of "confidence" from "quite other directions" Yasir Qadhi says:
    This clear double standard on Jeffery's part is not suprising; whenever an Orientalist finds some information that he feels can be used to discredit Islam and cast doubts on it, no matter what the context, authenticity or actual implications of the text may be.... Therefore the reason that these narrations are authentic, according to Jeffery, is because they agree with preconceived conclusions that were arrived from 'quite other directions'; unnamed and unknown directions, it should be pointed out!

    In the absence of Jeffery's unknown and unnamed directions for his confidence in the material of Ibn Abi Dawud, we go for something that is known, that is, the rejection of the hadith from `Abbad Ibn Suhayb. The case on the issue of the changes made by al-Hajjaj in `Uthman's mushaf can be considered null and void. It is worth reminding that there exists no parallel reports similar to the one discussed in order to authenticate the isnad and matn
    I believe it is time to go back to the Quran, and believe God, before a day comes when the messenger will complain to God, that the Muslims deserted the Quran,

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    112
    Religion
    الإسلام
    Last Activity
    25-10-2012
    At
    01:42 AM

    Default

    Before i road the text I said No
    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    181
    Gender
    Female
    Last Activity
    12-10-2014
    At
    11:19 PM

    Default

    Hadith Criticism Of The Report: The Study of Matn



    This report does not provide any clue of the nature of alleged changes that were made by al-Hajjaj in `Uthman's mushaf. An in-depth study shows that they are the differences in the Qira'at. Dr. `Umar Ibn Ibrahim Radwan did research on the issue alleged changes that al-Hajjaj made for his Ph.D thesis at the University of Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud. His thesis was published as a book from Riyadh in two volumes. The book is called Aara' al-Mustashriqin Hawl al-Qur'an al-Karim wa Tafsir: Dirasah Wa Naqd ("The Views Of The Orientalists About The Holy Qur'an & Its Interpretation: Study and Criticism").

    After quoting the report of Ibn Abi Dawud, Dr. Radwan mentions in the footnotes about the Qiraa'aat which the changes are associated with.
    al-Baqarah (2:259) lam yatasanna wanzur without ha to lam yatasannah with ha.

    Comments: Both readings are among The Seven as it is mentioned by Ibn Zanjalah in Hujjat al-Qira'at, page 142/143, where he says that Hamzah and al-Kisa'i read lam yatasanna without the letter ha in wasl [i.e., in case they didn't stop at the word yatasanna while reading] and the five other readings read yatasannah keeping the ha even when they didn't stop.


    and in al-Ma'idah (5:48) shari`atan wa minhajan was changed to shir`atan wa minhajan.
    Comments: al-Nakh'i and Ibn Waththab read with a fathah on the letter shin [i.e shar`atan] and the whole community of readers read shir`atan and I found nobody mentioning shari`atan.

    and in Yunus (10:22) huwal-ladhi yunash-shirukum was changed to yusay-yirukum
    Comments: Both readings are among The Seven. They were mentioned by Ibn Zanjalah in his book Hujjat al-Qira'at, page 329, where he says that Ibn `Amir read yunash-shirukum and the other readers read yusay-yirukum.

    and in Yusuf (12:45) ana-atikum bita'wilihi was changed to ana onabbio'kum bita'wilihi[20]
    Comments: al-Hasan read ana-atikum with a long hamzah having a fathah followed by the letter ta having a kasrah and a silent ya. And in wasl [i.e., when not stopping on the word], Nafi` and Abu Ja`far read ana onabbio'kum as it is mentioned by Ahmad `Abdul Ghani al-Dumyati in his book Ithafu Fudala' ilbashar Fil Qiraa'aat Ilarba'a 'Ashar, page 265.

    and in Mu'minun (23:85-89) sayaquluna lillah....lillah....lillah he made the two last occurrances allah....allah
    Comments: All these readings are among The Seven as mentioned by Ibn Zanjalah in Hujjat al-Qira'at, page 490, where he says that Abu 'Amir read allah...allahwith an alif and the others read lillah...lillah and all readings agreed on the first occurrence [i.e., lillah].

    and in as-Shu`ara in the story of Nuh (26:116) it was minal mukhrajina and in the story of Lut (26:167) it was minal marjumina. It was changed in the story of Nuh to minal marjumina and in the story of Lut to minal mukhrajina
    Comment: I didn't find anybody who mentioned what the author has said.

    and in az-Zukhruf (43:32) it was nahnu qasamna baynahum ma` ishahum and he changed it to ma`ishatahum.[26]
    Comments: The reading of the community [jumhoor] of readers is ma`ishatahum in singular. Al-'Amash and `Abdullah and Ibn `Abbas and Sufyan read ma`ishahum in plural as mentioned by Abu Hayyan in Al-Bahr al-Muhit, VIII - page 13.


    and in al-ladhina kafaru (47:15) min ma`inn ghayri yasin was changed to min ma`inn ghayri asin.
    Comments: The Seven except Ibn Kathir read ghayri asin with a madd [a long vowel], as for the reading yasinin it is shadhdh and was mentioned by Abu Hayyan who reported it using the words it was said that .... Refer to Hujjat al-Qira'at in page 667 by Ibn Zanjalah and the interpretation of Al-Bahr al-Muhit, VIII - page 79.



    and in al-Hadid (57:7) he changed fal-ladhina amanu minkum wat-taqaw lahum 'ajrun kabir to minkum wa anfaqu.
    Comment: I could not find the one who mentioned this reading.


    and in "When the Sun is folded up" (81:24) wa ma huwa `alal-ghaybi bidhanin to bidanin
    Comment: Ibn Kathir and Abu `Amr and al-Kisa'i and Rees and Ibn Mahran from Rawhread with the letter dha and the others read with the letter dad, and s o it is in all the Codices (the books). Refer to Al-Nashr fil Qira'at il'ashr, II - page 398/399.

    Dr. Radwan went on to say:
    These readings as I have just highlighted are among the correct (Sahih), Mutawatir and well established that we can read in any form it has been drawn into and among them are ones I could not verify which make us doubt about their being attributed to al-Hajjaj, especially because he was not isolated from the Ummah. Much more, in his time, no Muslim would let him change or replace anything traced back to the Prophet(Peace and blessing be upon him) whether it concerned Qur'an or hadith.
    All these arguments rebut the claims of the Orientalists. And the following points confirm the validity of my opinion:


    Al-Hajjaj being loyal to `Uthman [or from his court] and since he wouldn't forgive those who let `Uthman down on the day of al-Dar [or the house], how could he question `Uthman and his codex and make changes in it.




    The codex of `Uthman was spread everywhere and its copies in the time of `Uthman were countless. How about their number in the Umayyads time? Undoubtedly, their number has increased. Moreover, al-Hajjaj was the mere governor of one county of the huge Islamic land. Supposing that he was able to change the copies of his county how could he reach the ones in the other districts while there were thousands of copies! Much more, history did not mention contradictions between the Codices of Iraq and the other Codices. It is well known that the Great Book is saved in the chests of Muslims as much as it is saved in written form. If al-Hajjaj managed to change the lines how could he reach what is inside the chests of thousands of Muslims?




    It is known as well that the Abbassid dynasty was established on the ruins of the Umayyads and that they changed many of the policies of Bani Umayyah in the administration of the lands. They didn't spare any effort in showing the negative aspects of Bani Umayyah and in getting close to the people by spreading justice and defending it. If the Abbassids had found any changes in the Holy Book, it would have been the greatest opportunity for them to show how misleading Bani Umayyah were and, thus, give their own rule some additional legitimacy.


    These observation speak of themselves. Even if we assume that this incident is authentic, the question that arises is: so what? Al-Hajjaj supposedly made changes in 11 places, and even these places are documented to the last detail. Orientalists and missionaries, as usual, take some trivial piece of information (forgetting the fact that it is fabricated!) and make, not just a mountain, but an entire planet, out of an anthole.
    Let us now move to the Christian polemical sources such the letter of Byzantine Emperor Leo III to `Umar II and the apology of `Abd al-Masih al-Kindi on the claim that al-Hajjaj was responsible for present day Qur'anic text
    Last edited by ارجو رحمة الله; 03-10-2012 at 09:42 PM.
    I believe it is time to go back to the Quran, and believe God, before a day comes when the messenger will complain to God, that the Muslims deserted the Quran,

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

    نقره لتكبير أو تصغير الصورة ونقرتين لعرض الصورة في صفحة مستقلة بحجمها الطبيعي

Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur'an?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Sex-change vicar back in pulpit
    By سلام من فلسطين in forum المرأة في النصرانية
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 23-01-2013, 12:11 AM
  2. Q&A: How design can change the world
    By سعود العتيبي in forum منتديات الحاسب الألى وشبكة الإنترنت
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 11:50 PM
  3. Q&A: How design can change the world
    By سعود العتيبي in forum منتديات الحاسب الألى وشبكة الإنترنت
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 11:40 PM
  4. Q&A: How design can change the world
    By سعود العتيبي in forum منتديات الحاسب الألى وشبكة الإنترنت
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 11:30 PM
  5. Q&A: How design can change the world
    By سعود العتيبي in forum منتديات الحاسب الألى وشبكة الإنترنت
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2009, 11:20 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur'an?

Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur'an?