Firstly, it is possible that this fabrication found its way into Shi’ism in the second century, courtesy of some extremists. Some of their names have already been mentioned. They were prompted by the fact that the Book of Allah was completely pure of their innovations regarding Imamah, the Sahabah as well as other matters.
Secondly, most of the books which they consider reliable have this fabrication recorded in them. Most of these narrations are explicit, thus they cannot be re-interpreted to be explanations of the verses or different qira’at. They clearly state that a certain verse was originally such and such, but the Sahabah of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam changed it. The following are examples of the explicit words used:
هذه الآية مما غيروا وحروفوا
This verse is among that which they (the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum) changed and altered.
أنزل الله سبعة بأسمائهم فمحت قريش ستة وتركوا أبا لهب
Allah revealed seven, taking their names, but the Quraysh deleted six and left the name of Abu Lahab.
كانت فيه أسماء رجال فألقيت
The names of men were in it, but they were thrown out.
هكذا والله نزل به جبرائيل على محمد ولكنه فيما حرف من كتاب الله
By the oath of Allah, this is how Jibril revealed it upon Muhammad, but it is among that which was changed from the Book of Allah.
بلى والله إنه لمثبت فيها وإن أول من غير ذلك لابن أروى
Nay, by the oath of Allah, it was part of it. The first person who changed that was Ibn Arwa.
There are many other examples like these. Thus, if any Shia claims that the narrations in their books are narrations pertaining to qira’at or they are among those verses, the recitation of which has been abrogated, then he is attempting to hide this kufr, and he wishes to equate the truth with falsehood.
Thirdly, many of their scholars have stated that these narrations are found in abundance in their reliable books. This, undoubtedly, is a shame upon their books, and not the Book of Allah. In an attempt to rid themselves of this shame, and emerge from this abyss, some of the intelligent ones among them tried to hide or do away with this view. However, these narrations increased with the passing of each era, despite the rejection of those who rejected it. Some heretics, who joined the ranks of the Shia made it their responsibility to spread this rubbish. There is no doubt that the one who subscribes to this kufr has nothing to do with Islam. He has no link with the Book of Allah, the religion that Allah revealed, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam or the Ahlul Bayt. His religion is something other than Islam.
However, despite this, we see that those who narrate the tales which claim that the Qur’an was changed (such as al Majlisi in Bihar al Anwar, al Tabarsi in Fasl al Khitab) do not hesitate to use the Book of Allah as proof. They even begin each chapter of their books with a verse from the Book of Allah. Al Majlisi does this in his Bihar, al Tabarsi does it in Mustadrak al Wasa’il and other authors also do the same. In fact, al Tabarsi, who wrote that which he wrote in Fasl al Khitab, has a chapter in his book Mustadrak al Wasa’il named, “Chapter: It is commendable to perform wudu before touching the writing of the Qur’an, and it is impermissible for a person who does not have wudu or is impure to write the Qur’an.”
Al Majlisi, the scholar of the Shia, who claimed that there are many narrations regarding the fabrication and they are no less in number than the narrations regarding Imamah says:
أن الذي بين الدفتين كلام الله تعالى على الحقيقة من غير زيادة ولا نقصان
Whatever is between the two covers is the actual speech of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, without any addition or deletion.
Thereafter, he realised that this contradicts their narrations regarding Tahrif. Thus he said:
فإن قال قائل: كيف يصحّ القول بأن الذي بين الدفتين هو كلام الله تعالى على الحقيقة من غير زيادة ولا نقصان، وأنتم تروون عن الأئمة عليهم السلام أنهم قرؤوا: “كنتم خير أئمة أخرجت للناس” أو “كذلك جعلناكم أئمة وسطاً” وقرؤوا: “يسألونك الأنفال” وهذا بخلاف ما في المصحف الذي في أيدي الناس؟ قيل له:.. إن الأخبار التي جاءت بذلك أخبار آحاد لا يقطع على الله بصحتها، فلذلك وقفنا فيها، ولم نعدل عما في المصحف الظاهر على ما أمرنا به.. مع أنه لا ننكر أن تأتي القراءة على وجهين منزلتين أحدهما ما تضمنه المصحف، والثاني ما جاء به الخبر، كما يعترف مخالفونا به من نزول القرآن على وجوه شتى
If anyone objects saying, “how is it possible to say that whatever is between the two covers is he actual speech of Allah, without any addition or deletion, when you narrate that the Imams recited, ‘you are the best of Imams, who have been selected for humanity,’, ‘we made you moderate Imams,’ and ‘They ask you for the spoils’? These are all against the copy that the people have.” It will be said to him, “the narrations which have been reported regarding that are all ahad. It cannot be said with certainty that they are from Allah. Thus, we have hesitated regarding them, and we have not turned away from that which is in the available copies, in compliance to that which we have been instructed to do… We do not negate that a verse could have two revealed qira’at, one which is in conformity to that which appears in the (peoples) copy and one which is like that which appears in the narrations. Our opposition also admit that the Qur’an was revealed with many different variations.” (Thereafter, he points out a few of those variations)
If this was the real stance of those who spread those beliefs of kufr, then why did they spread and quote those fabrications? The answer is quite clear from all of that which has already passed, i.e. they wished to pacify their people and supporters that their beliefs are correct, and that the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum removed the verses which testify to the truth of their cult. This is also why we see them claiming that other books, besides the Qur’an, were revealed. Then they resorted to an ‘inner’ interpretation. These were all different schemes which they used to establish their corrupt beliefs.
Even though these efforts were primarily to get themselves out of the trouble that they were in, the consequences and effects thereof, upon some sects of the Shia were exceptionally destructive. In fact, the effects upon the Ithna ‘Ashariyyah (Twelvers) themselves were no less. The Akhbaris amongst them grant precedence to their narrations over the Book of Allah, as explained. Another serious consequence that came about was that they were believed to have their own version of the Qur’an.
Fourthly, just as they have narrations in which it is claimed that Tahrif took place, they also have narrations which reject this great lie, such as the statement of their Imam:
واجتمعت الأمة قاطبة لا اختلاف بينهم في ذلك أن القرآن حق لا ريب فيه عند جميع فرقها، فهم في حالة الاحتجاج عليه مصيبون، وعلى تصديق ما أنزل الله مهتدون، لقول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: “لا تجتمع أمتي على ضلالة
The entire ummah are unanimous, with no difference of opinion between them, that the Qur’an is the truth and there is no doubt regarding it. This is accepted by all of its sects. Thus, when they use it as proof, they are correct and when they believe in that which Allah revealed, they are rightly guided, as Nabi salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “my ummah will never be unanimous upon misguidance.”
Similarly the narrations regarding the virtues of reciting Qur’an, the merits of the one who carries the Qur’an in his bosom, the necessity of comparing their narrations to the Qur’an, holding onto it until Qiyamah, etc., all negate their claim that the Qur’an had been changed or that the true copy is in the possession of their awaited saviour.
Fifthly, it became clear to us that this fabrication refutes itself, and that among its components was that which destroys it. It merely has to be presented for the falsity of it to be seen. It also serves as evidence against the Rawafid, proving them to be great liars. ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who is a deity according to most of them, a Nabi according to some of them and an infallible Imam according to all of them, who was eventually made the khalifah and was granted rule, due to which he had all authority for the period of five years and nine months could not do anything about the ‘false’ Qur’an. It was being recited in the Masjids in every place, he himself would recite it whilst leading the salah and there were copies everywhere. If he felt that there was any change to it, as claimed by the Rafidah, then why did he sanction all of this? His son, Hassan succeeded him, but simply followed in the footsteps of his father and allowed everything to continue.
So where did these liars appear from, and how could they even claim that a single alphabet was changed, added or deleted? He (Amir al Mu’minin) would have fought a much more fierce battle against those who changed the Qur’an, as compared to the battle against the people of Sham, who opposed him in a matter which was extremely trivial compared to the Qur’an. Thus, the lies of the Rafidah have been exposed in a way that can never be denied. All praise belongs to Allah.
 Bihar al Anwar 92/55
 Rijal al Kashshi pg. 290, Bihar al Anwar 92/54
 Tafsir al ‘Ayyashi 1/12, Bihar al Anwar 92/55
 Bihar al Anwar 92/56
 Tafsir Furat 177, Bihar al Anwar 91/56
 Mustadrak al Wasa’il 1/43
 Bihar al Anwar 92/75
 Bihar al Anwar 92/75
 Like the Druz, who made up their own copy named, Mushaf al Munfarid Bithatih. Refer to Mustafa al Shak’ah: Islam bi la Mazhab (introduction to the fifth print), al Khatib: ‘Aqidat al Druz pg. 138-184
 Refer to al Sha’rani: Ta’aliq ‘Ilmiyyah (‘ala Sharh al Kafi li al Mazindarani) 2/414. Refer to the exact text under the discussion, “their beliefs regarding ijma’”.
 Usul al Kafi, Kitab Fadl al Qur’an 2/611
 Ibid 3/603
 Ibid 1/59
 Ibn Hazm: al Fisal 2/216-217Back to top