| Back to HOMEPAGE
WHICH PART IS 'QUR'AN' !?
[What follows are comments upon the text of Abu Ammaar
Yasir Qadhi's book An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qura'aan
(al-Hadaayah Publishing, 1999, ISBN - 1 898649 32 4)]
Is The Bismillah Part
Of The Qur'an?
Who has not heard the followers of Islam asserting that
ALL of the Arabic text that is asserted to have come through Caliph 'Uthman
is 'the Qur'an Muhammad gave us', and that
no-one has EVER differed on this matter?
In open discussion one hears nothing but assailing of
the Bible because the followers of Islam do not consider it as being something
'absolute'like
they say the Qur'an is, the latter being a text in which, we are assured,
nothing but the 'revealed'
Qur'an has EVER been inserted there.
Thus the present writer was astounded to find in a recent
(1999) book published by Al-Hadayyah in Birmingham, UK, a four page section
acknowledging that the four
Sunni 'founding' Imams were in fact divided (2 and 2) over whether the
bismillah is part of the 'revealed' Qur'an!
What is more astounding is that
these early scholars based their decision NOT UPON THE TEXT OF THE QUR'AN
as it is, but they exercised their freedom to make such an opinion ('ijtihad)
based merely on the conflicting content of the Ahadith!
If it were anyone other than these 4 'founding fathers',
men who are attributed with 'founding' the Madhabs (Malik, Abu Hanifah,
Shafi'i and Ahmad), one could throw this aside and simply say they were
errant scholars who didn't know what they were talking about. But being
such emminent men in the Sunni camp (and they are not alone!) one must
look carefully at the consequences of their evaluations.
We will do this by introducing the astounding content
of the aforementioned book in which the writer states:
"There
is a difference of opinion amongst the scholars of the Qur'an over whether
this phrase is to be considered as a verse at the beginning of each soorah,
in particular Soorah al-Faatihah,or whether this is merely a phrase
said forblessings between the soorahs, and is meant to identify
where one soorah ends amd the next begins."
(p. 157;
bold and enlargement added)
"Merely a phrase said for blessing"?!?!
What has Islam been hiding?!?!
Back to HOMEPAGE
Back to TOP
After listing 5 variations
in opinions concerning this topic of the bismillah and its relation
to the content of the Qur'an, the writer states:
"It can
be seen that the above opinions can be divided into two main categories:
those who claim the basmalah at the beginning of the soorahs is a verse
of the Qur'aan, and those who claim that it is not."
(p. 157)
His specific evidence is cited as:
"The scholars who claim
that the basmalah at the beginning of the soorahs is
a verse of the Qur'an, such as Imam ash-Shasfi'ee
(d. 204 A.H.), Imam Ahmad (d. 241 A.H.), and others, use as evidence the
fact that the mus-hafs that 'Uthman ordered to be written all contained
the basmalah at the beginning of the soorahs (except for the ninth soorah,
Soorah at-TawbaH). This, according to them, automatically implies that
the basmalah at the beginning of the soorahs is a verse in the Qur'aan,
since the Companions only wrote in the 'Uthmanic mus-haf what was agreed
to be the Qur'an, and did nto write anyhting besides it. In addition they
also deduce as evidence those narrations in which the Prophet (pubh) recited
the basmalah at the beginning of certain soorahs, such as the narration
in which the Prophet (pbuh) smiled with pleasure, and said, "Last night,
a soorah was revealed to me:
[Arabic omitted]
<<Bismillaah
ar-Rahmaan ar-Raheem. Verily We have given you the [Foundation] of Kawthar">>
[108:1-3]
In this narration, the Prophet (pbuh)
started the soorah with the basmalah, and it can be inferred that it was
revealed with the soorah." (p. 157f; bold and enlargement added)
But what about those Imams (and other scholars) who oppose
this view?
He immediately continues concerning the opinions of
these as:
"However, those
that do not hold that the basmalah at the beginning of the soorahs to be
a part of the Qur'an, such as Imaam Malik (d. 179 A.H.), Aboo Haneefah
(d. 150 A.H.) and others, use the fact that the purpose of the basmalah
is to signify where a new soorah starts, as the
following narration of Ibn 'Abbas indicates. Ibn 'Abbaas said, "The Prophet
(pbuh) did not know where a soorah ended until the basmalah was revealed
to him." Another narration that this group uses is the hadeeth in which
the Prophet (pbuh) said, "Allaah has said, 'I have divided the prayer between
Me and My servant, so when he says,
[Arabic omitted]
<<All Praise
is due to Allaah>> [1:1]
I respond, "My servant has Praised
Me."...'" . An even more explicit narration is the one reported by Aboo Hurayrah,
who said that the Prophet (pbuh) said,
[Arabic omitted]
<<All Praise
is due to Allaah>> [1:1]
is the 'Mother of the Qur'aan' and
the 'Mother of the Book' and the 'Seven oft-repeated verses.'" In this
narration, the Prophet (pbuh) started Soorah al-Fatihah without reciting
the basmalah, showing, according to these scholars, that it is not a verse
of the Qur'aan." (p. 158; bold and enlargement added)
Back to HOMEPAGE
The Qira'at Differ Over Bismillah!
His next statement is not, then, surprising:
"Based on this classic difference
of opinion, the qira'aat themselves differed over whether the basmalah
was a verse in Soorah al-Fatihah and the othre soorahs. Among the Qaarees,
Ibn Khatheer, 'Aasim and al-Kisaa'ee were the only ones who considered
it to be a verse at the beginning of each soorah, whereas the others did
not." (p. 158; bold added)
What kind of hoax has been perpetrated
upon the world so that we have been told one thing and now find another?
Should not these 'verses' be in footnotes stating something
like:
"In order to present a truthful
perspective of the preservation of the Qur'an in the qira'aat of 'soandso'
which we are printing in this text, we have removed the 113 basmalahs at
the beginning of the surahs and placed them in footnotes.
This is because it is necessary to
acknowledge that although the 'Uthmanic mushafs contain basmalah at the
beginning of every surah, neither the 4 Imams (and many other scholars),
nor the transmitters of the 7 qira'aat were in agreement as to whether
these 113 statements were actually part of the revelation (i.e. ayas) or
were only intended to show where one surah ended and another began.
In the case of future printings of
the qira'aat, then, it has been decided to leave them out of those texts
which contain the qira'a which do not contain them. In this way the masses
of the world will receive a true picture of what we actually ARE/ ARE NOT
in agreement over as being part of the true revealed Qur'an."
Surely this would be the ethical thing to do!!!
Back to HOMEPAGE
Back to TOP
Observations On These Matters:
1/ First, we marvel
to find that it means that up to at least the early 3rd century
A.H., such men were able to decide whether something was or was not a part
of the Qur'an merely by finding a suitable Hadith and arguing his point
of view!
Nor did it matter that another scholar was able to find
a completely conflicting Hadith and decide the exact opposite - concerning
a portion of what we are asssured is the 'Uthmanic text.
Nor did it matter that the 'Uthmanic text was the 'preserved',
unalterable text!
2/ Second, from this
we can see that while Islam laughs at the Bible because of some scholars
have decided to footnote a few verses of the text because certain early
scholars were against them, and so left them out of certain MSS, in fact
it is itself unable to decide on the 'original' content of the Qur'an by
looking at its MSS.
The disagreement over whether, from the beginning, the
bismillah was merely a divider between the surahs OR a 'revealed verse'
means that it is accepted that from 'Uthman's time the Qur'an was corrupt
by the addition of 113 false verses (ayas)!
It Doesn't Matter?!
AND can we believe the joke that is written toward the
end of this section by Yasir Qadhi? The author writes:
"The issue
of whether the basmalah is a verse at the beginning of the soorahs or not
is not of significant importance, since the difference
of opinion is not over whether the basmalah is an actual verse (the scholars
are agreed that it is a part of the verse in 27:30), but rather, where
it is a verse; is it a verse only in verse 27:30, or at the beginning of
all the soorahs, or only of Soorah al-Fatihah?" (p. 158f;
bold and enlargement added)
ARE WE TO BELIEVE THIS IS A 'SMALL'
MATTER WHEN IT COMES TO THE QUR'AN?!?!
IF THIS WERE THE BIBLE THE FOLLOWERS
OF ISLAM WOULD BE SHOUTING ' EVIDENCE OF CORRUPTION!', OR 'PROOF
THAT THE BIBLE TEXT IS UNCERTAIN!'
BUT, when it comes to the Qur'an we read:
"Therefore, the issue of whether
the basmalah forms a part of the soorah as a verse or not is the only area
in which difference of opinion is permitted. As such, it
occupies a unique status in that a person who denies the basmalah as a
verse of the soorah is not to be considered a disbeliever.
Contrary to this, to deny any other verse of the Qur'aan is considered
to be disbelief. Az-Zarkashi writes: "There is no difference of opinion
among the Miuslims that aperson who denies the basmalah as a verse in the
Qur'aan (at the beginning of the soorhas) is not to be considered a disbeliever.""
(p. 160; bold and enlargement added)
Can a Qur'an (and religion) which requires
that so many lies be hidden in order to defend itself be the revelation
of the True God?
Never!
In Jesus' Love
Brother Mark
Back to HOMEPAGE
Back to TOP |
