Chapter 3

Establishing that our Current Qur’an is from the Compilation of the Rightly Guided Khalifas

After the invalidity of the Prophetic compilation has become clear to us in the previous chapter, I will put forward in this chapter—to further confirm the truth in this matter—two proofs to establish the Khalifas’ compilation of the Qur’an, as follows:

1. Clear statements from the Imami scholars regarding the Khalifas’ compilation of the Qur’an

Here are the clear statements of the Imami scholars acknowledging the Khalifas’ compilation of the Qur’an:

1. Yusuf al Bahrani admits to the consensus of the Imami narrations as well as the reports of the Imami scholars stating that the current Qur’an was compiled by the Khalifas. He says:

و ثانيا أن االستدلال بإثباتها في المصاحف إنما يتم لو كان هذا القرآن الموجود بأيدينا جمع الإمام وليس كذلك لاتفاق الأخبار وكلمة الأصحاب وغيرهم على أنه جمع الخلفاء الثلاثة

Secondly, the evidence for establishing it in the codices can only be complete if the Qur’an which is present among us was compiled by the Imam and that is not the case due to the consensus of the narrations as well as the words of the scholars and others stating that the Qur’an was compiled by the three Khalifas.^[1]

If I had only transmitted this statement of al Bahrani in this chapter, it would have sufficed, due to the admission of the consensus of the Imami narrations as well as the words of the Imami scholars stating that the current Qur’an was compiled by the Khalifas.

2. ‘Ali ibn Musa ibn Muhammad Shafi’ al Tabrizi:

قلنا فيه أولا النقض بالقرآن المجيد وذكر ابن شهر آشوب أنه جمعه أمير المؤمنين فإن كان المراد هذا القرآن الذي بين بأيدينا فكونه مما جمعه غيره لا يحتاج إلى البيان

We say regarding it, firstly: the contradiction regarding the noble Qur’an, Ibn Shahrashub mentions, “Certainly ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu had compiled it.” If what is meant by this is the Qur’an which currently exists among us, then the fact that other than him had compiled it is something that needs no explanation.^[2]

Al Tabrizi had clearly defined the path for every stubborn one, since he considers the compilation of our current Qur’an by the Khalifas a clear matter which requires no explanation.

3. Muhammad al Tabrizi says:

الثاني من الوجوه الأخبار الكثيرة الدالة على وجود مصحف شريف لابي بن كعب وعبد الله بن مسعود مع اختلاف مصحف كل منهما مع الآخر مغاير للمصحف الموجود الآن الذي هو جمع الشيخين وأتباعهما

The second angle: The ample narrations indicating to the existence of an honourable Mushaf belonging to Ubayy ibn Ka’b and ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud, despite each of their Mushafs differing with the other, each contrasted with the Mushaf currently present which was compiled by Abu Bakr and ‘Umar and those who followed them.^[3]

4. Muhammad Hassan al Najafi al Jawahiri says:

والفصل بالبسملة في المصاحف لو سلم اعتبار هذا الجمع الواقع من غير الإمام

The separation by means of basmalah^[4] in the Mushafs, if the consideration that the current compilation being from other than ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu is accepted.^[5]

5. Aqa Rida al Hamdani says:

وفيه أن الفصل بالبسملة في المصاحف وتخصيص كل منهما باسم بعد تسليم اعتبار هذا الجمع الواقع من غير المعصوم لا ينافي اتحادهما في الواقع وارتباط بعضهما ببعض

Regarding it, the separation by means of basmalah in the Mushafs and each being specified with a name, after accepting the consideration that the compilation of the current Qur’an occurred from one who is fallible, this does not negate their amalgamation nor their cohesion with one another.^[6]

6. Yusuf al Bahrani says:

والمفهوم منها أيضا أن هذه القراءة قد أسقطها أصحاب الصدر الأول حين جمعوا القرآن

What is understood from it as well is that these modes of recitation were removed by the companions of the first generation when they compiled the Qur’an.^[7]

7. Hussain al Burujirdi says:

وكان القرآن عندهم يومئذ متفرقا في الأكتاف والأخشاب والألواح وكان عند بعضهم السورة والسورتان أو أقل أو أكثر إلى أن أمروا زيد بن ثابت بجمعه

The Qur’an with them at that time was scattered on shoulder blades, wood, and tablets. Some of them had one chapter or two chapters, or more, or less. It was like this until they commanded Zaid ibn Thabit to compile it.^[8]

8. Muhammad Hassan al Tabataba’i says:

أقول أقصى ما تدل عليه هذه الروايات مجرد جمعهم ما نزلت من السور والآيات وأما العناية بترتيب السور والآيات كما هو اليوم أو بترتيب فلا هذا هو الجمع الأول في عهد أبي بكر

a. I say: the furthest thing that these narrations indicate to is them merely compiling the verses and chapters that were revealed of the Qur’an. As for the concern regarding the organising of the chapters and verses of the Qur’an as we find it today or according to any other sequence, this did not occur; this was the first compilation of the Qur’an which took place in the era of Abu Bakr.^[9]

بعدما ارتحل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى الرفيق الأعلى… وبعد الرحلة بسنة واحدة حدثت حرب اليمامة التي قتل فيها سبعون من القراء ففكرت الخلافة في جمع السور والآيات في مصحف خوفا من حدوث حرب أخرى وفناء القراء وذهاب القرآن على أثر موتهم

b. After the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam returned to the highest of companionship… and after the passing of one year after the demise, the Battle of Yamamah took place wherein seventy of the Qurra’ (the Companions who had memorised and were well-versed in reciting the Qur’an) were killed. The Khalifah considered compiling the verses and chapters of the Qur’an into a Mushaf out of fear that another war would annihilate the Qurra’ resulting in the loss of the Qur’an due to their deaths.

9. Agha Buzurk al Tahrani establishes the Khalifas’ compilation of the Qur’an through various statements in his book al Naqd al Latif fi Nafy al Tahrif ‘an al Qur’an al Sharif:

وأما الجمع والتدوين بين الدفتين كذلك فكان في عصر الشيخين باتفاق الأخبار الصحيحة المترادفة كما صرح به العلامة ابن حجر فيما مر آنفا

a. As for the compilation of the Qur’an between two covers, it occurred during the era of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar according to the consensus of the authentic, successive narrations, as was made clear by Ibn Hajar, as passed previously.^[10]

الجمع الموجود اليوم على الترتيب المشهود بين الدفتين الذي جمعه الصحابي الشهير أبو خارجة زيد بن ثابت بن الضحاك الأنصاري المولود قبل الهجرة بإحدى عشرة سنة وكان عمره عند وفاة النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم إحدى وعشرين سنة وتوفي في خمس وأربعين من الهجرة وكان بدء جمعه في عصر الشيخين بعدما كثر القتل يوم اليمامة سنة ‍12ه ربيع الأول في حملة القرآن وخيف ضياع بعضه وقد أمراه بالجمع أو هو ائتمرهما فيه فجمع الآيات الإلهية المكتوبات في الصحف والقراطيس المتفرقة عند المسلمين والمحفوظات في صدور القراء المسلمة قرآنيتها عند جميع المسلمين حتى لم يعترض فرد من أفراده… ولو في آية واحدة من تلك الآيات أنها ليست من القرآن

b. The compilation, which is present today between two covers, which the famous Companion Abu Kharijah Zaid ibn Thabit ibn Dahhak al Ansari compiled, who was born eleven years before the emigration, whose age at the time of the Messenger’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam death was twenty-one years, and who passed away in the forty-fifth year after the emigration. His compilation began during the era of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma after many of the Companions who memorised the Qur’an were killed in the Battle of Yamamah which took place in the twelfth year after the emigration in the month of Rabi’ al Awwal. It was feared that a portion of the Qur’an be lost, thus they commanded him to compile the Qur’an, or he consulted them regarding it. Thus, he compiled the verses written on papers and scrolls, scattered amongst the Muslims and preserved in the chests of the Qurra’, whose proficiency in the Qur’an was accepted by all the Muslims so that not a single individual would object… and so that not a single verse from amongst those verses are not from the Qur’an.^[11]

الذي تحقق من كتب التواريخ في كيفية جمع القرآن الشريف بحيث ما وجدت له نافيا صريحا ولا مكذبا هو جمل ما شرحتها آنفا من عدم كونه في عهد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم مجموعا في موضع واحد كما هو اليوم وإن كان في عهد النبي مجموعا بآياتها وسورها في حافظة بعض الأصحاب والقراء وكان جميع الآيات مكتوبات لكنها في قطعات متفرقات… ثم أول من جمعه تسبيبا بمباشرة زيد بن ثابت بعد وقعة اليمامة في سنة اثنتي عشر من الهجرة كان أبو بكر والجمع الثاني لزيد بمعاونة بعض الأصحاب كان بأمر عثمان بعد سنة خمس وعشرين من الهجرة جمعوه كما هو اليوم

c. What is established from the books of history regarding the manner in which the Qur’an was compiled, such that I have not found a single clear rejector or belier, is exactly what I have explained earlier: the fact that the Qur’an was not compiled during the era of the Messenger in one place as it is today, even though the verses and chapters were collected in the memory of some Companions and Qurra’, and all the verses were written; however, on scattered articles. Thereafter, the first to compile it, as the cause with the physical cause of Zaid ibn Thabit after the incident of Yamamah in the twelfth year after the emigration, was Abu Bakr. The second compilation by Zaid with the assistance of some of the other Companions was done under the command of ‘Uthman after the twenty-fifth year after the emigration; they compiled it as it is today.^[12]

10. Abu al Hassan al Sha’rani says in his commentary on the book Jami’ al Ruwat:

والحق أنه جمع القرآن بين الدفتين على عهد أبي بكر وكان غير مدون قبله

The truth is that the Qur’an was compiled in book form in the era of Abu Bakr. It was not compiled before then.^[13]

11. On this topic Muhammad Fadil al Lankarani presents two meanings for the compilation^[14], and they are:

The first: organising of the verses within the chapters thereafter arranging the chapters: He acknowledges this kind of compilation having occurred during the era of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

The second: compiling those chapters into one Mushaf. He acknowledges the occurrence of this kind of compilation during the era of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and thereafter ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu, meaning the compilation of the chapters of the Qur’an did not take place during the era of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

From amongst his statements regarding this are:

الجمع بمعنى جمع المتفرقات وكتابتها في شيء واحد كالقرطاس والمصحف بناء على مغايرته للقرطاس وهذا هو الجمع المنسوب إلى أبي بكر ويدل بعض الروايات المتقدمة على نسبته إلى عمر بن الخطاب

a. Compilation here means the compiling of what was scattered and documenting it in one place as having it on paper and a Mushaf, based upon its difference from paper. This is the compilation that is attributed to Abu Bakr and some of the earlier narrations indicate that it is attributed to ‘Umar ibn al Khattab.^[15]

وأما الجمع الوارد في الروايات المتقدمة أعم من الروايات الدالة على عدم تحققه في زمن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم والروايات الدالة على تحققه في زمنه من ناحية الأشخاص فالمراد به هو جمع المتفرقات والمتشتتات من جهة الأشياء المكتوبة عليها والمنقوشة فيها غاية الأمر أن الجمع في زمن النبي كان بمعنى القدرة على تحصيل القرآن بأجمعه وحصوله له كذلك وبعبارة أخرى كان عنده جميع القرآن في الأشياء المتفرقة والجمع بعد حياته بمعنى جمعه في اللوحين والقرطاس والمصحف

b. As for the compilation which is mentioned in the earlier narrations, it is more general than the narrations indicating the lack of any compilation during the era of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The narrations indicating that a compilation did take place during the era of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in terms of individuals carrying it out, what is meant thereby is the collection of what was scattered and dispersed in terms of it being written and engraved upon objects. The object of the matter is that the compilation in the era of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam meant the capability of collecting the entirety of the Qur’an and that had occurred. In other words, the Qur’an was compiled during the Messenger’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam time on scattered objects. The compilation which took place after the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was compiling it on scrolls, paper, and a codex.^[16]

وقد انقدح من جميع ما ذكرنا بطوله وتفصيله بطلان هذه الروايات وعدم إمكان الأخذ بمضمونها وأنه لا محيص عن الالتزام بكون الجمع والتأليف الراجع إلى تميز الآيات بعضها عن بعض وتبين كون الآية الفلانية جزءا من السورة الفلانية بل وموقعها من تلك السورة وأنها هي الآية الثانية منها مثلا أو الثالثة أو الرابعة وهكذا وكذا تميز السور بعضها عن بعض واقعا في عهد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم وعصره بأمره وإخباره غاية الأمر تفرقها وتشتتها من جهة الأشياء المكتوبة عليها والمنقوشة فيها كالعسيب واللخاف ومثلها نعم لا ينبغى إنكار ارتباط جهة من القرآن بأبي بكر وكذا بعثمان أما ارتباطه بأبي بكر فهو أنه قد جمع تلك المتفرقات التي كان شأنها مبنيا من جميع الجهات وكانت خالية من نقاط الإبهام والإجمال بتمام المعنى في قرطاس أو مصحف الذي هو بمعنى القرطاس أو قطع الجلد المدبوغ وقد وقع التصريح في بعض الروايات المتقدمة بأن أبا بكر هو أول من جمع القرآن بين اللوحين وقد عرفت تصريح الحارث المحاسبي بذلك وأن جمع أبي بكر بمنزلة خيط ربط الأوراق المتفرقة الموجودة في بيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولا يبعد الالتزام بما في بعض تلك الروايات من كون المصحف الذي جمع أبو بكر فيه القرآن هو الذي كان عنده زمن حياته وكان بعده باختيار عمر وانتقل منه إلى حفصة بنته زوج النبي صلى الله عليه وآله

c. All of what we have mentioned—at length and in detail—had brought forth the invalidity of these narrations and the impossibility of accepting its contents, and that there is no escape from adhering to the fact that the compilation is distinguishing verses from each other and clarifying that such and such a verse is a portion of such and such a chapter, in fact positioned in that chapter, and that it is the second verse of that chapter, for example, or the third or the fourth and so on. In a similar manner, the chapters were distinguished from each other. This took place during the time of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and by his command. The object of the matter is what was dispersed and scattered in terms of it being written and engraved upon objects like branches and shoulder-blades and the like. Yes, the link Abu Bakr and likewise ‘Uthman shares with the Qur’an should not be denied. As for Abu Bakr’s link with the Qur’an, it is that he collected what was scattered which was clear from all angles and it was free from any points of ambiguity and generality in the complete sense, on paper or a codex which means a collection of paper, or on pieces of tanned skin. It is clearly mentioned in some of the earlier narrations that Abu Bakr was the first to compile the Qur’an into book form. I acknowledged al Harith al Muhasibi’s clear expression of that. Abu Bakr’s compilation was like a thread which tied together the scattered pieces of paper found in the house of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. It would not be far-fetched to cling to what is found in some of the narrations stating that the Mushaf which Abu Bakr compiled the Qur’an in, is the exact same which he had during his lifetime and was chosen by ‘Umar after him and moved from him to his daughter Hafsah who was the wife of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.^[17]

12. Ahmed ibn Muhammad Mahdi al Naraqi emphasises the lack of conclusive evidence for the sequence of the current Qur’an due to his belief that it was compiled by the three Khalifas. He says:

ثم على المختار هل تعاد البسملة بينهما كالحلي والفاضل وكثير من المتأخرين لثبوتها بينهما متواترا وكتبها في المصاحف إجماعا ولحصول البراءة اليقينية به أو لا… الظاهر هو الأول لا لما ذكر لعدم حجية هذا التواتر لانتهائه إلى عمل الخلفاء الثلاث

Thereafter, based upon the preferred view, is the basmalah between the two of them repeated (like al Hilli, al Fadil, and many of the latter scholars [suggest]) due to it being established between them via mutawatir narrations and it being written in the Mushafs through consensus and due to the chapter al Bara’ah certainly having it or not? What is apparent is the first, not due to what is mentioned, due to the lack of decisive proof of these successive narrations stemming from the actions of the three Khalifas.^[18]

13. Al Khu’i did not address with rejection the fact that the sequencing of the current Qur’an is due to the compilation of the three Khalifas. Rather, he clarifies that what is necessary from it is the belief that there is increase in the Qur’an. He says:

ما ذكره في المدارك من إثبات الفصل بينهما بالبسملة في المصاحف كساير السور وأجيب بأن هذه الكيفية من جمع الخلفاء فلا يدل على أن النزول كان كذلك وفيه أن مرجع ذلك إلى دعوى التحريف من ناحية الزيادة التي هي مقطوعة البطلان باتفاق المسلمين وإنما الخلاف في التحريف من ناحية النقيصة على أنا قد أثبتنا في بحث التفسير بطلان ذلك أيضا بما لا مزيد عليه فلاحظ إن شئت

What he mentioned in al Madarik establishing the separation between the two of them by means of basmalah in the Mushaf is like the remainder of the chapters. I respond by saying that this method is from the compilation of the Khalifas; it does not indicate that the revelation was revealed as such. And regarding it, the point of reference for that is the claim of distortion from the angle of increase in the Qur’an which is definitely invalid by the consensus of Muslims. The difference of opinion regarding the distortion is from the angle of deficiency, although in the study of exegesis we have established that this is invalid as well with nothing more to it; note that if you wish.^[19]

14. Muhammad Baqir al Wahid al Bahbahani sees no validity in relying upon what is found in the codices of separation between the two chapters al Duha and al Sharh by means of basmalah, because he sees it to be from the actions of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu. It is as if he implicitly acknowledges that our current Mushaf is from the compilation of the three Khalifas. He says:

ولا يضر ذكر سورتين في رواية المفضل لكون الضبط في جميع المصاحف بصورة سورتين قطعا والاشتهار في الألسن عند الكل بسورة والضحى وبسورة ألم نشرح وهكذا الحال في الأخيرتين فإن الاطلاق المتعارف عند المسلمين ليس إلا كذلك ولا يضر ذلك لأنه صار بعد ضبط عثمان وأي عبرة بفعل عثمان بل بفعل القراء أيضا لما عرفت من أن العبرة بتجويز الأئمة عليهم السلام ذلك لا أن ما فعلوه حق بل لا شك في بطلان كثير منه وأن الحق في مصحف علي والأئمة عليهم السلام

Al Mufaddal states that mentioning the two chapters is not an issue. In fact, it is consistently documented in all the codices as two distinct chapters. Additionally, it is widely recognised in the forms al Duha and al Inshirah. Hence, the same applies to the two last chapters. What is broadly accepted amongst the Muslims is simply this. And this does not pose an issue since it occurred after the documentation of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu; and what consideration is given to the actions of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu? Rather what consideration is given to the actions of the Qurra’ as well? As you know, what is considered is what is authorised by the Imams ‘alayhim al Salam, because the truth comes from them. There is no doubt in the invalidity of majority of what is mentioned and the truth is what is found in the Mushaf of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the Imams ‘alayhim al Salam.^[20]

15. Muhammad Sadiq al Ruhani insinuates that there is no decisive evidence for the separation via basmalah between the two chapters al Duha and al Sharh—since the Imamiyyah consider them to be one chapter—and this rejection of any proof will never stand unless it is from the actions of the fallible—and they are the Khalifas radiya Llahu ‘anhum who compiled the Qur’an. If the separation via basmalah was from the action of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, it would have been decisive, binding proof for that. He says:

ثم إن الأقوى عدم الفصل بينهما بالبسملة كما هو المنسوب إلى الأكثر وعن التهذيب عندنا لا يفصل بينهما بالبسملة… وأما ثبوتها في المصاحف فهو أعم من الجزئية إذ إثباتها فيها لعله يكون ناشئا عن اعتقاد أن كل واحدة منها سورة مستقلة

Thereafter, the most preferred view is the absence of any separation between the two chapters with basmalah as is attributed to majority of the scholars. After revision, according to us the chapters are not separated with basmalah… As for it being present within the codices, it is making general what is partial, perhaps it being present could stem from the belief that each is an independent chapter.^[21]

With these clear admissions from the senior Imami scholars, there is no doubt that the current Qur’an is from the compilation of the three Khalifas radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

NEXT⇒ 2. Accusing the Companions of dismissing the Mushaf of ‘Ali is an implicit admission of them compiling the Qur’an

^[1] Yusuf al Bahrani: Al Hada’iq al Nadirah, 8/206.

^[2] ‘Ali ibn Musa ibn Muhammad Shafi’ al Tabrizi: Mir’at al Kutub, pg. 32.

^[3] Muhammad al Tabrizi: Misbah al Wasa’il fi Matalib al Rasa’il, pg. 84.

^[4] The wording: Bismillah al Rahman al Rahim.

^[5] Muhammad Hassan al Najafi al Jawahiri: Jawahir al Kalam, 10/23.

^[6] Aqa Rida al Hamdani: Misbah al Faqih, 2/316.

^[7] Yusuf al Bahrani: Al Hada’iq al Nadirah, 6/24-25.

^[8] Hussain al Burujirdi: Tafsir Sirat al Mustaqim, 2/532.

^[9] Muhammad Hassan al Tabataba’i: Al Mizan fi Tafsir al Qur’an, 12/121.

^[10] Agha Buzurk al Tahrani: Al Naqd al Latif fi Nafy al Tahrif ‘an al Qur’an al Sharif, pg. 919.

^[11] Ibid., pg. 922.

^[12] Ibid., pg. 935.

^[13] Muhammad ‘Ali al Ardabili: Jami’ al Ruwat, 1/138, footnote 1.

^[14] That is in his book Madkhal al Tafsir, pg. 263-310, during his study of the topic of the compilation of the Qur’an.

^[15] Muhammad Fadil al Lankarani: Madkhal al Tafsir, pg. 300.

^[16] Ibid., pg. 296.

^[17] Ibid., pg. 295-296.

^[18] Ahmed ibn Muhammad Mahdi al Naraqi: Mustanad al Shia, 5/130.

^[19] Abu al Qasim al Khu’i: Al Salah, 3/356.

^[20] Muhammad Baqir al Wahid al Bahbahani: Masabih al Zalam fi Sharh Mafatih al Shara’i’, 7/325.

^[21] Muhammad Sadiq al Ruhani: Fiqh al Sadiq, 4/439-440.

BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents