Mirza abu al-Qasim bin Muhammad Hasan al-Qummi (d.

1231 AH) in his

book al-Qawanin al-Muhkamah fil-Usoul vol.2 discusses the Qur’an and its
preservation. The text is advanced and the author’s weak Arabic requires
us to explain some of the texts we’re quoting.

He begins on page 321 by stating his opinion:

‫أما تواتر القرآن في الجملة ووجوب العمل بما في أيدينا اليوم فمما ال شك فيه وال شبهة تعتريه لكن تواتر جميع ما نزل على‬
‫محمد صلى هللا عليه وآله غير معلوم وكذا وجوب تواتره‬

[As for the Qur’an being Mutawatir in general and the necessity of using
whatever is in our hands today (from Allah’s book) then there are no
doubts about this. However, the Tawatur of all the revelation that
Muhammad (saw) received is not confirmed nor is the necessity of its
Tawatur.]

Comment: He is saying that the Qur’an we have in our hands today is

mass transmitted and we must utilize it to extract rulings BUT it’ not
confirmed that this Qur’an contains all the revealed verses nor that all of
those revelations reached us through mass transmission, such a matter
isn’t necessary in his opinion. (You will see why below)

What he means above is that the Qur’an became mass transmitted after
certain alterations took place. (As you will also see below)

He continues on the same page by informing us of why Tawatur can’t be

claimed for all revelation. He does so by showing that the Shia differed on
the matter of the corruption of Allah’s book and lists examples of scholars
who believe and others who disbelieve in it.

He then quotes some books containing narrations and how some scholars
dealt with them or how they explained corruption to be related to the
interpretation of verses. Then on page 326 he writes:

‫ثم ذكر قول الصحابة لنبيهم صلى هللا عليه وآله على الحوض إذا سئلهم كيف خلفتموني في الثقلين من بعدي فيقولون أما‬
‫األكبر فحرفناه وبدلناه وأما األصغر فقتلناه ثم يذادون عن الحوض وأما الدليل على الثاني فقوله تعالى ال يأتيه الباطل من بين‬
‫يديه وال من خلفه وال داللة فيه أصال كما ال يخفى وقوله تعالى إنا نحن نزلنا الذكر وإنا له لحافظون وفيه أنه ال يدل على‬
‫عدم التغيير في القرآن الذي بأيدينا فيكفي كونه محفوظا عند األئمة عليهم السالم‬

[Then he mentioned the saying of the Companions to the Prophet (saw)

on the fount when he (saw) asks: “How did you succeed me in the two
weighty things?” They reply: “As for the bigger one we corrupted it and
changed it. As for the smallest of the two, we have murdered them. So
they are chased away from the fount. Regarding the evidence for the
second, it is Allah’s words {Falsehood shall not approach it from in front
of it nor from behind} This (verse) does not constitute evidence ( for its
preservation) as is clear. Then there is Allah’s saying {It is we who have
revealed the remembrance and it is we who shall guard it} This (too) does
not prove that the Qur’an in our hands is safe from corruption for it is
sufficient that the Imams (as) have it preserved with them]

Comment: You can see that he writes above that the two verses are not
acceptable evidence to prove that the Qur’an we have in our hands today
is unchanged. He says it can simply mean that it’s preserved with the 12
Imams.

He continues:

‫وال ريب أن ما في أيدينا أيضا محفوظ من أن يتطرق إليه نقص آخر أو زيادة مع احتمال أن يراد من قوله تعالى لحافظون‬
‫لعالمون‬

[No doubt that what is in our hands is also preserved from undergoing
other deletions or an addition, taking into account that it’s possible that
the meaning of {It is we who shall guard it} means “Know it”.]

Comment: Notice that he says “what we have today is safe from

undergoing other deletions” Meaning, the Qur’an has already had verses
deleted from it but since it became mass transmitted today then no
further deletions shall take place. He also rejects additions generally.
Then he gives a different interpretation to the popular verse above and
claims it means “We know it” instead of “We shall preserve it”.

He writes on pg.327:

‫وفيه أنه لم يخرج بذلك عن كونه معجزا لبقاء األسلوب والبالغة اللذين هما مناط االعجاز بحالهما بل سائر وجوه االعجاز‬
‫أيضا مع أنه لم يدخل االخبار على حصول الزيادة وادعى على عدمها أيضا االجماع الشيخ والطبرسي‬

[Furthermore, it (meaning the Qur’an in our hands) continues to be a

miraculous text due to the fact that both its style and eloquence
remained present, they are the center of miraculous texts and even other
miraculous factors (remained therein). Although the narrations have not
declared that any additions took place and consensus was claimed on
this by al-Shaykh and al-Tubrusi]

Comment: He is saying that even after the book was corrupted yet it can
still be considered a miraculous text since the corruption did not alter the
style and eloquence. He believes that addition has not taken place and
that only addition can affect the miraculous nature of the text not the
deletion.

‫والذي له مدخلية في االخراج عن حد االعجاز هو الزيادة غالبا وكذلك لم يظهر وقوع التحريف في آيات االحكام مع أنه لو‬
‫وقع فليس بأعظم من غيبة اإلمام عليه السالم‬

[What can play a major role in ruining the miraculous nature (of the text)
are usually the additions. In addition, it doesn’t appear that corruption
has reached the verses of religious rulings although even if it did then it is
no greater than the absence of our Imam (as)]

Comment: The author affirmed what we said above that deletions do not
harm the beauty of the text. Then he says that the corruption didn’t seem
to affect any of the verses containing religious laws therefore they are
still present. He adds, that even if the verses of the laws were in fact
corrupted, then it’s a lot less worse than the Imam who is hiding. So
there’s nothing that guarantees the safety of such verses from
corruption since the loss of the Imam is more important for them than
the loss of some verses.

Next the author discusses the prophetic order to refer to the book of
Allah and hold fast to its rulings in the light of the above.

He says on page 328:

‫ما ورد من هذه األخبار عن النبي صلى هللا عليه وآله وسلم ال ينافي ما ذكرنا فإنه أمر أيضا بالتمسك باألوصياء عليهم‬
‫السالم مع أنهم صاروا ممنوعين عن التبليغ‬

[What was reported from those narrations from the Prophet (saw) does
not conflict with what we previously mentioned (That the Qur’an has been
corrupted) for he has also ordered us to hold on to the legatees (as)
although they are currently prevented from preaching]

Comment: As is clear, the author says that the narrations of the Prophet
(saw) do not oppose the belief in Tahreef. The Prophet (saw) ordered us
to obey the 12 Imams according to the author but they’re not available.
Similarly, the verses that were deleted by some evil men according to his
sect are also unavailable.

‫وأما ما ورد من األئمة عليهم السالم فال ينافي تجويزهم العمل بها من باب التقية وحكم هللا الظاهري‬
[As for what was reported from the Imams (as) with this regard, then it
also doesn’t conflict as they permitted it out of Taqiyyah and following
Allah’s apparent laws]

Comment: He means that those narrations where the Imams ordered their
followers to read the same Qur’an we’re reading and present the
narrations to Allah’s book. He says this was only out of Taqiyyah.

‫كما سنقول في القراءات السبعة المتواترة ما يقرب من ذلك أو نقول إنا ال نلتزم تغيير االحكام فيما ذكر في الكتاب الذي‬
‫بأيدينا اليوم بل هي صحيحة وإن كان ال ينافي ذلك حذف بعض الكلمات منه كذكر أسماء أهل البيت عليهم السالم والمنافقين‬
‫وعدم ذكر بعض األحكام أيضا‬

[We will say something similar regarding the seven Mutawatir recitations.
We say that we do not hold the opinion that the rulings were changed in
the Book we hold in our hands today rather they’re correct although this
does not conflict with believing that some words were deleted such as
the names of Ahlul-Bayt (as) or the hypocrites or even some rulings too]

Comment: He says that holding on to the seven recitations is also out of

Taqiyyah and repeats that he doesn’t believe the rulings found in the
present Qur’an have been corrupted although other types of corruption
crept into our Book.

The author then mentions that the above can be opposed by the claim
that the seven recitations were mass transmitted and some of their
scholars claimed consensus on this and some even went further to
include the other three recitations. He then moves on to mention another
group of their scholars who objected to this and disbelieved in the mass
transmission of the seven recitations.

He says on page 330, that those who claim Tawatur for these recitations
imply that they’re mass transmitted directly from Allah through the
Prophet (saw). He says this is incorrect based on what he wrote in the
previous section about how all the Books were burned by `Uthman.

‫نعم إن كان مرادهم تواترها من األئمة عليهم السالم بمعنى تجويزهم قرائتها والعمل على مقتضاها فهذا هو الذي يمكن أن‬
‫يدعى معلوميتها من الشارع ألمرهم بقرائة القرآن كما يقرء الناس وتقريرهم ألصحابهم على ذلك وهذا ال ينافي عدم علمية‬
‫صدورها عن النبي صلى هللا عليه وآله ووقوع الزيادة والنقصان فيه واالذعان بذلك والسكوت عما سواه أوفق بطريقة‬
‫االحتياط‬

[Whereas if they meant that it is mass transmitted from the Imams (as)
that they permitted their followers to recite the Book and work with its
rulings then this is a legitimate claim since they ordered that the Qur’an
be recited the way the people recited it and they accepted this. This
doesn’t conflict with it having came from the Prophet (saw) but then
having been exposed to additions and deletions however remaining silent
in this regard was better out of precaution.]

On page 333 he quotes after a long discussion of what was meant by the

“seven letters” in the popular narration:

‫نعم اتفق التواتر في الطبقات الالحقة وأيضا‬ … ‫وكيف كان فدعوى تواتر السبعة عن النبي صلى هللا عليه وآله محل كالم‬
‫ من آحاد المخالفين استبدوا بآرائهم كما تقدم وإسنادهم إلى النبي صلى هللا عليه وآله إن ثبت فال‬I‫تواترها عنهم كيف يفيدوهم‬
‫حجة‬

[Either way, the mass transmission of the seven recitation directly from
the Prophet (saw) is disputed [etc] Yes, Tawatur did occur in later stages
but how can this be useful for them (meaning the Shia) if it came through
individuals from among our opponents who had complete control over
this matter and their chains to the Prophet (saw) even if they were able to
establish them then they are still not binding upon us]

That’s the end of his chapter regarding the Book of Allah and from this we
conclude the following:

A- He casts doubt on the seven recitations preserved by the nation.

B- He casts great doubt on the Book compiled by `Uthman.

C- He refutes any arguments in support of the safety of the Qur’an from

corruption.

D- He does not view that the corruption of the Qur’an is a great matter
since the occultation of his Imam is a greater calamity in his opinion.

E- He doesn’t think additions took place as it would affect the miraculous

nature of the text but is ultimately unsure of this.

F- He believes deletions and omissions took place and doesn’t seem to

object to this.

G- He believes the verses containing rulings in the Qur’an are intact and
correct even though some rulings may have been deleted.
H- He believes the Imams ordered the Shia to recite the Qur’an in our
hands today and to present the narrations to Allah’s book but only out of
Taqiyyah.