Navigation Menu

Tafsir Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir On The Report Of Wahb Ibn Munabbih

Ibn Hajar’s Extensive Sharh Of The Report Of Ibn Abbas

Summarising The Words Of Ibn Hajar & Ibn Kathir

Report of Ibn Abbas

No one removes the wording of any Book from the Books of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic. Rather, they distort it through tawil (interpretation), by interpreting it in a way other than its true interpretation.

Ibn Hajar’s Main Point on the Report from Ibn Abbas

Ibn Hajar explains that the wording, “They distort,” was explained as “they remove.” However, he says that he did not find this wording connected from Ibn Abbas through a firm route. What comes before it, and what comes after it, are both reported from Ibn Abbas through the route of Ali ibn Abi Talhah, but this specific wording about “removing” is not firmly established from him. Ibn Hajar also notes that another report from Ibn Abbas, mentioned earlier under the verse, “Every day He is upon a matter,” gives a meaning that does not agree with explaining tahrif (distortion) as removing the wording itself.

Ibn Hajar does not simply accept the wording “They remove” as firmly established from Ibn Abbas.

He says it is reported from Wahb ibn Munabbih, and he also mentions that Abu Ubaydah explained tahrif as turning words and changing them. Al Raghib explained tahrif as making speech carry a possible meaning in a way that moves it away from the intended meaning. So, Ibn Hajar does not make Ibn Abbas’s report the only foundation here. He places it among related explanations, while saying its firm connection to Ibn Abbas is not established.

The Meaning of Tahrif and Tawil

The main wording under study is: “No one removes the wording of any Book from the Books of Allah. Rather, they distort it by tawil (interpretation), interpreting it in a way other than its true interpretation.”

Ibn Hajar says this wording may be from al Bukhari himself, added after the explanation of Ibn Abbas. It may also be the rest of Ibn Abbas’s explanation.

Ibn al Mulqin understood it as al Bukhari’s chosen view. According to this reading, al Bukhari’s view is that the Jews and Christians distorted the meaning by false interpretation, rather than physically removing the original wording of Allah’s revealed Books.

Ibn Hajar then explains that al Bukhari’s use of tawil means that they distort the intended meaning through interpretation. For example, if a word in Hebrew can carry a close meaning and a far meaning, and the close meaning is intended, they carry it upon the far meaning. This is tahrif (distortion) through meaning, not necessarily through changing every wording.

The Views on the Corruption of the Tawrah and Injil

Ibn Hajar reports that later commentators mentioned several views about the corruption of the Tawrah (Torah) and Injil (Gospel).

The first view says that all of it was changed. Ibn Hajar considers this excessive if taken literally, because Qur’an verses and reports show that some parts remained. He gives the example of Allah saying that the People of the Book found the Messenger ﷺ written with them in the Tawrah and Injil. He also mentions the story of the two Jews who were stoned, where the verse of stoning was found. This shows that not everything had disappeared or been changed. (Sahih al Bukhari 4556; Sahih Muslim 1699a)

The second view says that change occurred in most of it.

The first view should be understood in this way, because the proofs for widespread change are many.

The third view says that change occurred in a small part, while most of it remained as it was.

Ibn Taymiyyah supported this in al Jawab al Sahih liman Baddala Din al Masih by Ibn Taymiyyah. (Sahih al Bukhari 7543)

The fourth view says that change occurred only in the meanings, not in the wording. This is the view connected to al Bukhari’s statement here.

Ibn Hajar says Ibn Taymiyyah reported that the ulama had two views on the issue, and he mentioned proofs used for the view that tahrif was in meaning. One proof was Allah’s statement that none can change His words. Ibn Hajar answers that this proof is not decisive, because another verse mentions people changing what they heard. He says the first verse can be understood as referring to Allah’s judgement and decree, while the second can include wording and meaning.

Ibn Hajar’s Response to the Argument from Manuscript Agreement

One argument mentioned for the view that the wording was not changed is that copies of the Tawrah in the east, west, north, and south were said to be the same. Ibn Hajar calls this a strange proof. If change occurred, the changed wording could also have become the standard version. The copies that exist later may all agree because they all go back to the version that became fixed after the change.

He then says that reports about this are abundant. Regarding the Tawrah, he mentions that Bukhtnassar destroyed Bayt al Maqdis, killed and captured many from Bani Israil, and destroyed their books. Later, Ezra dictated the Tawrah to them. Regarding the Injil, he says that when the Romans entered Christianity, their king gathered their leading men upon the Injil that was in their possession.

So Ibn Hajar does not deny that tahrif of meanings occurred. He says that this is present among them in great amount. The real question is whether the wording was also changed. He then adds that both books contain wordings that cannot be from Allah in that form.

Ibn Hazm’s Evidence for Wording Corruption

He also Ibn Hazm’s strong argument that the Tawrah and Injil in the hands of the Jews and Christians were corrupted. Ibn Hazm mentioned examples from their scriptures that contain ugly and false statements, such as wording attributed to Allah after Adam عليه السلام ate from the tree, the claim that the magicians copied some of the signs sent against Pharaoh, and the offensive story attributed to the daughters of Lut عليه السلام. Ibn Hazm used these examples to show that such wording cannot be from Allah.

Ibn Hazm also argued from Qur’an verses which say that the People of the Book distort words from their places, say lies about Allah while knowing, and say, “It is from Allah,” when it is not from Allah. He also argued that Allah mentioned the description of the Sahabah in the Tawrah and Injil, while the Jews and Christians do not possess that wording in their books. Therefore, Ibn Hazm rejected the claim that their present scriptures are fully sound.

His final argument is powerful: if their transmission is accepted as mass transmission in everything they possess, then their claim that Muhammad ﷺ is not mentioned in their books would also have to be accepted. Since that is false, it is not permissible to accept some of their claim and reject some of it when both are presented through the same route.

Al Zarkashi’s Objection and Ibn Hajar’s Reply

Al Zarkashi strongly objected to the view that tahrif occurred only in meaning. He said there is no disagreement that they changed and distorted the Tawrah, and that being occupied with reading and writing it is not permissible by consensus. He used the report of Umar bringing a page from the Tawrah to the Prophet ﷺ as proof, because the Prophet ﷺ became angry and said that if Musa عليه السلام were alive, he would have no way open except to follow him.

Ibn Hajar says that if a true consensus is established, then there is no further speech. But he says al Zarkashi’s wording still needs examination, because the view he rejected was attributed to Wahb ibn Munabbih, who was very knowledgeable about the Tawrah, and it was also attributed to Ibn Abbas, the interpreter of the Qur’an. Ibn Hajar says it would have been better to answer the proofs of the opposing view rather than dismiss it.

The Hadith of Umar and the Tawrah

Ibn Hajar gathers the routes of the hadith about Umar bringing material from the Tawrah. One route from Jabir says Umar copied a book from the Tawrah in Arabic and brought it to the Prophet ﷺ. The Prophet’s face changed, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Do not ask the People of the Book about anything, for they will never guide you, and they have gone astray. You will either deny truth or believe falsehood. By Allah, if Musa عليه السلام were among you, nothing would be open to him except that he follow me.” Ibn Hajar notes that this route contains weakness. (Musnad Ahmad 14631; Musnad al Bazzar, as in Kashf al Astar by al Haythami, 124)

Another route from Jabir says Umar came with a book from the People of the Book and read it to the Prophet ﷺ, so he became angry. Its chain contains Mujalid ibn Said, who is weak. (Musnad Ahmad 15156; Musnad Abi Yala 2135)

Another route from Abu al Darda mentions Umar coming with collected material from the Tawrah, and includes the wording: “If Musa عليه السلام were among you, then you followed him and left me, you would go far astray.” Ibn Hajar notes that this route contains an unnamed narrator, and there is difference concerning it. (al Tabarani 7214)

Another route from Abd Allah ibn Thabit says Umar came after a man from Bani Qurayzah wrote collections from the Tawrah for him. The Prophet’s face changed, and the hadith says: “By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad, if Musa عليه السلام appeared among you, then you followed him and left me, you would go astray.” (Musnad Ahmad 15864)

Another report from Khalid ibn Urfutah mentions Umar punishing a man who copied the Book of Daniel and ordering him to erase it. Umar then remembered that he had once copied a book from the People of the Book and brought it to the Prophet ﷺ, who became angry until his cheeks became red. The Prophet ﷺ said that he had been given concise and final speech, and had brought the religion white and pure, so people should not fall into confusion. Ibn Hajar notes that this route contains Abd al Rahman ibn Ishaq al Wasiti, who is weak. (Taqyid al Ilm by al Khatib al Baghdadi, p. 51; al Matalib by Ibn Hajar, 3034)

Ibn Hajar’s Final Ruling on Reading the Previous Scriptures

After gathering the routes, Ibn Hajar says that none of them is strong enough on its own to be used as proof. However, taken together, they show that the report has a basis.

He then gives his balanced conclusion. The dislike of reading from the previous scriptures is karahah tanzih (dislike without prohibition), not karahah tahrim (forbidden dislike). The matter must be separated according to the person. Someone who is not firmly grounded in iman (faith) and not deeply rooted in knowledge should not look into those books, because it may cause confusion. A person who is firmly grounded may look into them, especially when there is a need to reply to opponents.

Ibn Hajar supports this by saying that the imams, earlier and later, quoted from the Tawrah and used what they found in it to require the Jews to accept Muhammad ﷺ. If they believed looking into it was not permissible in every situation, they would not have done this repeatedly.

Conclusion Of Ibn Hajar’s Words

Ibn Hajar’s overall position is that he accepts that tahrif (distortion) of meaning among the Jews and Christians is real and widespread. He also acknowledges that there are wordings in the Tawrah and Injil as they exist that cannot be from Allah. At the same time, he rejects the unrestricted claim that every single word was changed, because Qur’an verses and reports show that some true material remained.

Regarding Ibn Abbas, Ibn Hajar is precise. The explanation “They distort” meaning “They remove” is not firmly connected from Ibn Abbas through a reliable route. The wording that says no one removes the wording of Allah’s Books may be al Bukhari’s own explanation, and it may be a continuation of Ibn Abbas’s explanation. Ibn Hajar does not present that possibility as certain. His method is to preserve the different reports, test their strength, and then give a careful conclusion that joins the evidence without exaggeration. (Fath Al Bari By Ibn Hajar 24/563–572)

Wahb ibn Munabbih’s Statement

Wahb ibn Munabbih said: “The Torah and the Gospel are as Allah sent them down. Not a single letter from them was changed. However, they misguide through distortion and interpretation, and through books which they used to write from themselves, saying: ‘It is from Allah,’ though it is not from Allah. As for the Books of Allah, they are preserved and do not change.”

Ibn Kathir’s Explanation

Ibn Kathir explains that Wahb’s words need examining.

If Wahb meant the Torah and Gospel as they exist in the hands of the Jews and Christians, then Ibn Kathir says this cannot be accepted without qualification.

He says there is no doubt that alteration, distortion, additions, and omissions entered those written copies. He also says that the Arabic versions known to people contain major errors, many additions, many omissions, and serious mistakes.

But if Wahb meant the Books of Allah as they are with Allah, then Ibn Kathir agrees with him. In that sense, they are preserved, and nothing false can enter them. (Tasfir Ibn Kathir 2/65)

Full Translation Of Sources Used

Tafsir Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir On The Report Of Wahb Ibn Munabbih

وَإِنَّ مِنْهُمْ لَفَرِيقًا يَلْوُونَ أَلْسِنَتَهُم بِالْكِتَابِ لِتَحْسَبُوهُ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَمَا هُوَ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَيَقُولُونَ هُوَ مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ وَمَا هُوَ مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ

“And indeed, among them is a group who twist their tongues with the Book, so that people would think it is from the Book, though it is not from the Book. They say: “It is from Allah,” though it is not from Allah. They tell lies against Allah while they know.” (Al Imran: 78)

Allah, the Most High, tells about the Jews, upon whom are the curses of Allah, that among them is a group who change words from their proper places, replace the words of Allah, and move them away from the meaning intended by them. They do this to make the ignorant think that it is found in the Book of Allah in that way.

They then ascribe it to Allah, while it is a lie against Allah. They know within themselves that they have lied and invented all of that. For this reason, He said:

وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ

“They tell lies against Allah while they know.” (Al Imran: 78)

Mujahid, al Shaʿbi, al Hasan, Qatadah, and al Rabiʿ ibn Anas said regarding His saying, “They twist their tongues with the Book”: they change it.

Likewise, al Bukhari reported from Ibn Abbas رضي الله عنهما that they change and add.

None from the creation of Allah can remove the wording of a Book from the Books of Allah. Rather, they change it by interpreting it upon other than its true interpretation.

Wahb ibn Munabbih said: “The Torah and the Gospel are as Allah sent them down. Not a single letter from them was changed. However, they misguide through distortion and interpretation, and through books which they used to write from themselves, saying: ‘It is from Allah,’ though it is not from Allah. As for the Books of Allah, they are preserved and do not change.”

Ibn Abi Hatim reported this.

If Wahb meant what is in their hands from that, then there is no doubt that alteration, distortion, addition, and omission have entered it. As for the Arabic translation of what is seen of that, it contains great error, many additions and omissions, and clear mistake. It belongs to the category of explaining what has been translated and Arabised, while the understanding of many of them, rather most of them, in fact all of them, is corrupt.

But if he meant the Books of Allah which are His Books with Him, then they are as he said: preserved, and nothing has entered them.

Tafsir Ibn Kathir 2/65

Ibn Hajar’s Extensive Sharh Of The Report Of Ibn Abbas

Chapter on the Statement of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic

بَلْ هُوَ قُرْآنٌ مَجِيدٌ ۝ فِي لَوْحٍ مَحْفُوظٍ

Rather, it is a glorious Qur’an, in a preserved tablet. (al Buruj 21–22)

وَالطُّورِ ۝ وَكِتَابٍ مَسْطُورٍ

By the Mount, and by a written Book. (al Tur 1–2)

Qatadah (d. 117AH) said: “Written.”

وَمَا يَسْطُرُونَ

And what they write. (al Qalam 1)

It means: “They write lines.”

فِي أُمِّ الْكِتَابِ

In the Mother of the Book. (al Zukhruf 4)

It means: “The whole of the Book and its foundation.”

مَا يَلْفِظُ مِنْ قَوْلٍ

He does not utter any word. (Qaf 18)

It means: “He does not speak anything except that it is written against him.”

Ibn Abbas said: “Good and evil are written.”

يُحَرِّفُونَ

They distort. (al Nisa 46)

It means: “They remove.”

No one removes the wording of any Book from the Books of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic. Rather, they distort it through tawil (interpretation), by interpreting it in a way other than its true interpretation.

دِرَاسَتِهِمْ

Their study. (al Anam 156)

It means: “Their recitation.”

وَتَعِيَهَا أُذُنٌ وَاعِيَةٌ

And a listening ear may retain it. (al Haqqah 12)

It means: “Preserving.”

وَتَعِيَهَا

And it retains it. (al Haqqah 12)

It means: “It preserves it.”

وَأُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ لِأُنْذِرَكُمْ بِهِ

And this Qur’an has been revealed to me so that I may warn you through it. (al Anam 19)

It means: “The people of Makkah.”

وَمَنْ بَلَغَ

And whomever it reaches. (al Anam 19)

This Qur’an is a warning for him.

The Explanation of al Bukhari

His statement: “Chapter on the Statement of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic:”

بَلْ هُوَ قُرْآنٌ مَجِيدٌ ۝ فِي لَوْحٍ مَحْفُوظٍ

Rather, it is a glorious Qur’an, in a preserved tablet. (al Buruj 21–22)

Al Bukhari (d. 256AH) said in Khalq Afal al Ibad by al Bukhari, after mentioning this verse and the one after it: “Allah has mentioned that the Qur’an is preserved and written. The Qur’an that is held in hearts, written in the masahif (copies of the Qur’an), and recited on tongues, is the speech of Allah and is not created. As for the ink, paper, and leather, they are created.”

A Written Book

His statement:

وَالطُّورِ ۝ وَكِتَابٍ مَسْطُورٍ

By the Mount, and by a written Book. (al Tur 1–2)

Qatadah said: “Written.”

Al Bukhari connected this report in Khalq Afal al Ibad by al Bukhari from the route of Yazid ibn Zuray (d. 182AH), from Said ibn Abi Arubah (d. 156AH), from Qatadah, regarding His statement:

وَالطُّورِ ۝ وَكِتَابٍ مَسْطُورٍ

By the Mount, and by a written Book. (al Tur 1–2)

He said: “Al mastur means: the written.”

فِي رَقٍّ مَنْشُورٍ

On an unfolded parchment. (al Tur 3)

He said: “It is the Book.” Abd ibn Humayd (d. 249AH) also connected it through the narration of Shayban ibn Abd al Rahman (d. 164AH), and Abd al Razzaq (d. 211AH) reported it from Mamar (d. 153AH). Both narrated it from Qatadah with similar wording. Abd ibn Humayd also reported from Ibn Abi Najih (d. 131AH), from Mujahid (d. 104AH), regarding His statement:

وَكِتَابٍ مَسْطُورٍ

And by a written Book. (al Tur 2)

He said: “Written pages.”

فِي رَقٍّ مَنْشُورٍ

On an unfolded parchment. (al Tur 3)

He said: “In pages.”

What They Write

His statement:

وَمَا يَسْطُرُونَ

And what they write. (al Qalam 1)

It means: “They write.” Abd ibn Humayd reported it from the route of Shayban ibn Abd al Rahman, from Qatadah, regarding His statement:

وَالْقَلَمِ وَمَا يَسْطُرُونَ

By the pen, and what they write. (al Qalam 1)

He said: “And what they write.”

The Mother of the Book

His statement: “In the Mother of the Book: the whole of the Book and its foundation.”

Abu Dawud (d. 275AH) connected it in al Nasikh wal Mansukh by Abu Dawud from the route of Mamar, from Qatadah, regarding His statement:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ وَعِنْدَهُ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ

Allah erases what He wills and confirms, and with Him is the Mother of the Book. (al Rad 39)

He said: “The whole of the Book and its foundation.” Abd al Razzaq also reported it in Tafsir Abd al Razzaq from Mamar, from Qatadah. Ibn Abi Hatim (d. 327AH) also reported from the route of Ali ibn Abi Talhah (d. 143AH), from Ibn Abbas, regarding His statement:

وَعِنْدَهُ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ

And with Him is the Mother of the Book. (al Rad 39)

He said: “All of that is with Him in the Mother of the Book: what is abrogating and abrogated, what is written, and what is changed.” (This is how al Hafiz mentioned Qatadah’s explanation of the verse in al Rad, even though the verse mentioned earlier is the verse in al Zukhruf. Qatadah explained it in the same way as he explained the verse in al Rad, as Abd al Razzaq reported from his route in Tafsir Abd al Razzaq, 2/194, and al Tabari in Tafsir al Tabari, 25/48. So referring to both of them would have been more fitting, unless al Hafiz intended to add the benefit that Qatadah explained both verses with one explanation. Allah knows best.)

He Does Not Utter Any Word

His statement:

مَا يَلْفِظُ مِنْ قَوْلٍ

He does not utter any word. (Qaf 18)

It means: “He does not speak anything except that it is written against him.” Ibn Abi Hatim connected it from the route of Shuayb ibn Ishaq (d. 189AH), from Said ibn Abi Arubah, from Qatadah and al Hasan (d. 110AH), regarding His statement:

مَا يَلْفِظُ مِنْ قَوْلٍ

He does not utter any word. (Qaf 18)

They said: “He does not speak anything except that it is written against him.” He also reported from the route of Zaidah ibn Qudamah (d. 161AH), from al Amash (d. 148AH), from Mujammi, who said: “The angel’s ink is his saliva, and his pen is his tongue.”

Good and Evil Are Written

His statement: “Ibn Abbas said: Good and evil are written.”

Al Tabari (d. 310AH) and Ibn Abi Hatim connected it from the route of Hisham ibn Hassan (d. 147AH), from Ikrimah (d. 105AH), from Ibn Abbas, regarding His statement:

مَا يَلْفِظُ مِنْ قَوْلٍ

He does not utter any word. (Qaf 18)

He said: “Only good and evil are written.” He also reported from the route of Ali ibn Abi Talhah, from Ibn Abbas, regarding His statement:

مَا يَلْفِظُ مِنْ قَوْلٍ إِلَّا لَدَيْهِ رَقِيبٌ عَتِيدٌ

He does not utter any word except that with him is an observer, ready. (Qaf 18)

He said: “Everything he says of good or evil is written, until even his saying, ‘I ate,’ ‘I drank,’ ‘I went,’ ‘I came,’ and ‘I saw,’ is written. Then, when Thursday comes, his words and deeds are presented. What was good or evil is kept, and the rest is cast aside. That is His statement:

يَمْحُو اللَّهُ مَا يَشَاءُ وَيُثْبِتُ وَعِنْدَهُ أُمُّ الْكِتَابِ

Allah erases what He wills and confirms, and with Him is the Mother of the Book. (al Rad 39)

Al Tabari reported this from the route of al Kalbi (d. 146AH), from Abu Salih, from Jabir ibn Abd Allah ibn Riab, with a kasrah on the ra, then a hamzah after the ya, and ending with a ba. Al Kalbi is matruk (abandoned), and Abu Salih did not meet this Jabir. Al Tabari also reported from the route of Said ibn Abi Arubah, from Qatadah and al Hasan:

مَا يَلْفِظُ مِنْ قَوْلٍ

He does not utter any word. (Qaf 18)

They said: “He does not speak anything except that it is written against him.” Ikrimah used to say: “That is only regarding good and evil.”

I say: The two reports can be joined together through the mentioned narration of Ali ibn Abi Talhah. (This is how al Hafiz attributed it to al Tabari. We did not find it there from Ibn Abbas. Rather, al Tabari attributed it to Ikrimah, as al Hafiz will mention. So it appears that attributing it to al Tabari is a mistake. Allah knows best. It is from the mentioned route in al Musannaf by Ibn Abi Shaybah, 13/575, and al Hakim graded it authentic, 2/465.) (There is weakness in this Abu Salih. He is the freed slave of Umm Hani. He is not Dhakwan al Samman.)

The Meaning of Tahrif

His statement:

يُحَرِّفُونَ

They distort. (al Nisa 46)

It means: “They remove.”

I have not seen this connected as the statement of Ibn Abbas through a sound route, even though what comes before it is from his speech, and likewise what comes after it, namely his statement: “Their study means their recitation,” and what follows it. Ibn Abi Hatim reported all of that from the route of Ali ibn Abi Talhah, from Ibn Abbas.

What has already passed in the chapter on His statement:

كُلَّ يَوْمٍ هُوَ فِي شَأْنٍ

Every day He is upon a matter. (al Rahman 29)

from Ibn Abbas is contrary to what is mentioned here, namely the explanation of “they distort” as “they remove.” Yes, Ibn Abi Hatim reported it from the route of Wahb ibn Munabbih (d. 114AH). Abu Ubaydah (d. 209AH) said in Majaz al Qur’an by Abu Ubaydah, regarding His statement:

يُحَرِّفُونَ الْكَلِمَ عَنْ مَوَاضِعِهِ

They distort words from their places. (al Nisa 46)

He said: “They turn them and change them.” Al Raghib (d. 502AH) said: “Tahrif (distortion) is inclining something. Distorting speech means placing it on an edge of possibility, so that it can be carried upon two meanings or more.”

The Wording of the Books of Allah

His statement: “No one removes the wording of any Book from the Books of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic. Rather, they distort it through tawil (interpretation), by interpreting it in a way other than its true interpretation.”

In the narration of al Kushmihani (d. 389AH), the wording is: “They interpret it upon something other than its true interpretation.”

Ibn al Mulqin (d. 804AH), said in his commentary: “What he said is one of the two views regarding the explanation of this verse, and it is the view chosen by him, meaning al Bukhari. Many of our companions have clearly said that the Jews and Christians changed the Tawrah (Torah) and Injil (Gospel), and they built upon that the permissibility of treating their pages with disrespect. This opposes what al Bukhari said here.”

His words end here. This is almost clear that the words, “No one removes” until the end, are from al Bukhari. He added them after the explanation of Ibn Abbas. It is also possible that they are the rest of Ibn Abbas’s words in explanation of the verse.

Some later commentators said: “There are several views regarding this issue.

The first view is that all of it was changed. This is what is required by the quoted view about the permissibility of treating it with disrespect. This is going too far. Whoever spoke in unrestricted terms should be understood as referring to most of it. Otherwise, it is denial of what is plain, because many Qur’an verses and reports show that many things from it remained unchanged. Among that is the statement of Allah:

الَّذِينَ يَتَّبِعُونَ الرَّسُولَ النَّبِيَّ الْأُمِّيَّ الَّذِي يَجِدُونَهُ مَكْتُوبًا عِنْدَهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَالْإِنْجِيلِ

Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find written with them in the Tawrah and the Injil. (al Araf 157)

Also included is the story of the stoning of the two Jews, in which the verse of stoning was found. This is supported by His statement:

قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِالتَّوْرَاةِ فَاتْلُوهَا إِنْ كُنْتُمْ صَادِقِينَ

Say: Bring the Tawrah and recite it, if you are truthful. (Al Imran 93)

(Sahih al Bukhari 4556; Sahih Muslim 1699a)

The second view is that change did occur, but in most of it. Its proofs are many, and the first view should be understood upon this.

The third view is that change occurred in a small part of it, while most of it remained as it was. Shaykh Taqi al Din Ibn Taymiyyah supported this in al Jawab al Sahih liman Baddala Din al Masih by Ibn Taymiyyah. (Sahih al Bukhari 7543)

The fourth view is that change and alteration occurred only in meanings, not wordings. This is what is mentioned here. Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about this issue on its own, so he answered in his Fatawa that the ulama have two views about it. He argued for the second through many ways. Among them is the statement of Allah:

لَا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ

There is no changer of His words. (al Anam 115)

This is opposed by His statement:

فَمَنْ بَدَّلَهُ بَعْدَ مَا سَمِعَهُ فَإِنَّمَا إِثْمُهُ عَلَى الَّذِينَ يُبَدِّلُونَهُ

So whoever changes it after hearing it, its sin is only upon those who change it. (al Baqarah 181)

It is not necessary to join between the two by carrying the negation upon wording and the affirmation upon meaning. It is permissible to carry the negation upon ruling, and the affirmation upon what is more general than wording and meaning.

Another proof is that copies of the Tawrah in the east, west, south, and north do not differ. It is impossible for change to occur and then for all copies to come together upon one method. This is a strange proof, because if change could occur, the changed wording could also be removed. The copies that exist now are the copies upon which their matter settled after the changing. Reports about that are overflowing.

As for what relates to the Tawrah, when Bukhtnassar invaded Bayt al Maqdis, destroyed Bani Israil, and scattered them between those killed and those taken captive, he destroyed their books until Ezra came and dictated it to them. As for what relates to the Injil, when the Romans entered Christianity, their king gathered their leading men upon what is in the Injil that they had.

Their tahrif (distortion) of meanings is not denied. Rather, it is found among them in great amount. The point of dispute is whether the wordings were distorted or not. In both books, there are things that cannot at all be from Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, with those wordings.

Ibn Hazm on the Tawrah and Injil

Abu Muhammad ibn Hazm (d. 456AH) listed many things of this type in al Fisal fil Milal wal Nihal by Ibn Hazm. Among that is his mention that in the first chapter, on the first sheet of the Tawrah of the Jews, which is with their Rabbaniyyun, their Qarra’un, their Ananiyyah, and their Isawiyyah, wherever they are in the eastern and western regions, it does not differ and is upon one wording. If anyone tried to add one word to it or remove one word from it, he would be exposed among them. They agree that it goes back to the Harunite rabbis who were before the second destruction. They mention that it was conveyed from those people to Ezra the Harunite.

They also mention that Allah, the Most High, said when Adam عليه السلام ate from the tree: “This Adam has become like one of us in knowing good and evil.” They mention that the magicians did for Pharaoh the like of what was sent upon them of blood and frogs, and that they were unable to do the gnats. They mention that after the destruction of the people of Lut عليه السلام, his two daughters each lay with their father after giving him wine to drink, so he slept with both of them and both became pregnant by him, along with other condemned and ugly matters. (The Rabbaniyyun are a group from the Jews who represent most of them. This title was given to them because of their belief in the books of the Talmud written by the rabbaniyyun, who are the rabbis or jurists of this group.) (This is a group from the Jews called the Qarra’un. They were named that because of their belief in the Miqra, meaning the recited scripture, which is the books of the Old Testament.)

He mentioned in other places that change occurred in it until it was destroyed. Then the mentioned Ezra dictated it in the form it is now. Then he brought things from the actual Tawrah that is now in their hands, in which the lie is very clear. Then he said: “It has reached us that some Muslims deny that the Tawrah and Injil in the hands of the Jews and Christians are distorted. What led them to that is their lack of care for the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Both contain that they distort words from their places, and that:

وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ

They say lies against Allah while they know. (Al Imran 75)

وَيَقُولُونَ هُوَ مِنْ عِنْدِ اللَّهِ وَمَا هُوَ مِنْ عِنْدِ اللَّهِ

They say, “It is from Allah,” while it is not from Allah. (Al Imran 78)

يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لِمَ تَلْبِسُونَ الْحَقَّ بِالْبَاطِلِ وَتَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَأَنْتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ

O People of the Book, why do you mix truth with falsehood and hide the truth while you know? (Al Imran 71)

It is said to those who deny this: Allah, the Most High, said about the description of the Sahabah:

ذَلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِي الْإِنْجِيلِ كَزَرْعٍ أَخْرَجَ شَطْأَهُ

That is their description in the Tawrah. And their description in the Injil is like a plant that brings forth its shoot. (al Fath 29)

until the end of the surah. The Jews and Christians do not possess anything of this.

It is also said to whoever claims that their transmission is mass transmitted: They have agreed that there is no mention of Muhammad ﷺ in the two books. If you believe them regarding what is in their hands because it has been transmitted as mass transmission, then believe them in what they claimed, that there is no mention of Muhammad ﷺ or his Companions. Otherwise, it is not permissible to believe one part and reject another when both come by the same route.”

His words end here, and they contain benefits. (This is a Jewish group attributed to Anan, also said as Anan, son of Dawud, one of their major rabbis.) (The Isawiyyah are a Jewish group attributed to Abu Isa al Asbahani, a Jewish man who used to say that Isa عليه السلام and Muhammad ﷺ were Prophets, but they restricted the message of Muhammad ﷺ to the Arabs only.) (The wording kept in the main translation is from manuscript A, and it agrees with what is in al Fisal by Ibn Hazm. He repeatedly uses this wording. In manuscript ʿA, it reads: their care. In manuscript S, it reads: their concern.) (This points to the statement of Allah in Surah Al Imran 71: O People of the Book, why do you mix truth with falsehood and hide the truth while you know?)

Al Zarkashi and the Question of Reading the Previous Scriptures

Shaykh Badr al Din al Zarkashi (d. 794AH) said: “Some later people were deceived by this, meaning by what al Bukhari said. They said: There is disagreement regarding the tahrif (distortion) of the Tawrah. Is it in wording and meaning, or in meaning only?

They leaned to the second view and saw that reading it is permissible. This is a false statement. There is no disagreement that they distorted and changed it. Being occupied with reading it and writing it is not permissible by consensus. The Prophet ﷺ became angry when he saw Umar with a page containing something from the Tawrah, and he said: ‘If Musa عليه السلام were alive, nothing would be open to him except following me.’ If it had not been a sin, he would not have become angry about it.”

I say: If the consensus is established, then there is no further speech concerning it. He restricted it to being occupied with writing it and looking into it. If he meant someone who becomes occupied with that and nothing else, then the intended point is not achieved, because it would be understood that if he became occupied with it alongside other things, it would be permissible. If he meant being occupied with it in an unrestricted way, then this is open to examination.

His description of the mentioned view as false also needs examination, due to what has already passed. It has been attributed to Wahb ibn Munabbih, and he was among the most knowledgeable people regarding the Tawrah.

It was also attributed to Ibn Abbas, the interpreter of the Qur’an. It would have been more fitting for him to leave aside simple dismissal and occupy himself with answering the proofs of the one who opposed him, which I have related. His use of the story of Umar as proof for the lack of permissibility, in the matter about which he claimed consensus, also needs examination. I will mention that after bringing the routes of the mentioned hadith.

Ahmad and al Bazzar reported it, and the wording is his, from the hadith of Jabir, who said: Umar copied a book from the Tawrah in Arabic, then brought it to the Prophet ﷺ. He began reading, and the face of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ began to change. A man from the Ansar said to him: “Woe to you, son of al Khattab. Do you not see the face of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ?” The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: “Do not ask the People of the Book about anything, for they will never guide you, and they have gone astray. You will either deny truth or believe falsehood. By Allah, if Musa عليه السلام were among you, nothing would be open to him except that he follow me.” Its chain contains Jabir al Jufi (d. 128AH), and he is weak. (Musnad Ahmad 14631; Musnad al Bazzar, as in Kashf al Astar by al Haythami, 124) (Its detailed referencing will come soon.) (As in Kashf al Astar by al Haythami, 124.)

Ahmad and Abu Yala also reported it through another route from Jabir: Umar came with a book that he had obtained from some of the books of the People of the Book. He read it to the Prophet ﷺ, so he became angry. He mentioned similar wording, without the statement of the Ansari. In it is: “By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, if Musa عليه السلام were alive, nothing would be open to him except that he follow me.” Its chain contains Mujalid ibn Said (d. 144AH), and he is weak. (Musnad Ahmad 15156; Musnad Abi Yala 2135)

Al Tabarani also reported it through a chain containing an unnamed narrator, and there is difference concerning it, from Abu al Darda: Umar came with collections from the Tawrah, and he mentioned it with similar wording. He named the Ansari who addressed Umar as Abd Allah ibn Zayd, the one who saw the adhan. In it is: “If Musa عليه السلام were among you, then you followed him and left me, you would go far astray.” (The Musnad of Abu al Darda was omitted from the printed edition of al Tabarani. Part of the mentioned hadith was reported there, 7214.)

Ahmad and al Tabarani reported it from the hadith of Abd Allah ibn Thabit, who said: Umar came and said: “O Messenger of Allah, I passed by a brother of mine from Bani Qurayzah, and he wrote for me collections from the Tawrah. Should I present them to you?” He said: The face of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ changed. The hadith contains: “By the One in Whose Hand is the soul of Muhammad, if Musa عليه السلام appeared among you, then you followed him and left me, you would go astray.” (Musnad Ahmad 15864) (This wording appeared in both originals and in manuscript S. It is permissible on the assumption that kana and its noun are omitted. This is often used in the language of the Arabs after conditional in and law, and sometimes without them. The hadith also came like that in Naqd al Manqul by Ibn al Qayyim, p. 64, and in Ithaf al Maharah by al Busiri, 1/6332, with kana and its noun omitted. Perhaps this is what appeared in al Hafiz’s copy of Musnad Ahmad. In our printed edition of Musnad Ahmad, kana is present.) 

Abu Yala reported from the route of Khalid ibn Urfutah, who said: I was with Umar when a man from Abd al Qays came to him. Umar struck him with a stick he had with him. The man said: “What have I done, O Commander of the Believers?” He said: “Are you the one who copied the Book of Daniel?” He said: “Command me with your command.” He said: “Go and erase it. If it reaches me that you read it or made someone else read it, I will surely punish you severely.”

Then he said: “I went and copied a book from the People of the Book. Then I came, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to me: ‘What is this?’ I said: ‘A book I copied so that we may increase in knowledge along with our knowledge.’ He became angry until his cheeks became red.” Then he mentioned a story in which he said: “O people, I have been given the concise and final forms of speech, and speech has been made concise for me. I have brought it to you white and pure, so do not fall into confusion.” Its chain contains Abd al Rahman ibn Ishaq al Wasiti, and he is weak. (This is in his large Musnad. Al Khatib al Baghdadi reported it in Taqyid al Ilm by al Khatib al Baghdadi, p. 51, through his route. Al Hafiz himself mentioned it in al Matalib by Ibn Hajar, 3034, and his condition there was to mention the additions of Abu Yala in his large Musnad.)

These are all the routes of this hadith. Even though none of them contains what can be used as proof on its own, their combined routes show that it has a basis.

What appears correct is that the dislike of this is karahah tanzih (dislike without prohibition), not karahah tahrim (forbidden dislike). What is better in this matter is to separate between one who is not firmly grounded and has not become among those deeply rooted in iman, for it is not permissible for him to look into any of that, and one who is deeply rooted. For such a person, it is permissible, especially when there is a need to reply to an opponent.

This is shown by the fact that the imams, earlier and later, quoted from the Tawrah and used what they extracted from their book to require the Jews to affirm Muhammad ﷺ. If they did not believe looking into it was permissible, they would not have done that, nor would they have repeatedly followed one another in doing it.

As for using what is reported of his anger as proof for prohibition, and the claim that if it had not been a sin he would not have become angry over it, this is answered by saying that he may become angry over something disliked, or over doing what is less suitable, if it comes from someone for whom that is not fitting. This is like his anger over Muadh making Fajr prayer long through recitation.

He may also become angry at someone who falls short in understanding a clear matter, like the one who asked about a lost camel. It has already appeared in Sahih al Bukhari 91 about anger during admonition, and it has passed in Sahih al Bukhari 6112 about what type of anger is permissible. (Sahih al Bukhari 705)

The Meaning of Tawil

His statement: “They interpret it.”

Abu Ubaydah and a group said regarding the statement of Allah:

وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُ إِلَّا اللَّهُ

And none knows its interpretation except Allah. (Al Imran 7)

“Tawil means tafsir (explanation).”

Others made a distinction between them. Abu Ubayd al Harawi (d. 401AH) said: “Tawil is to return one of two possible meanings to what agrees with the apparent meaning. Tafsir is to uncover what is meant by a wording that is unclear.” The author of al Nihayah said: “Tawil is to move the apparent wording away from its original placement to something that needs proof. Without that proof, the apparent meaning would not be left.” It was also said: “Tawil is to show a possible meaning of a wording that is supported by evidence outside it.” Some gave as an example the statement of Allah:

لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ

There is no doubt in it. (al Baqarah 2)

They said: Whoever says, “There is no doubt in it,” then this is tafsir. Whoever says, “Because it is truth in itself and does not accept doubt,” then this is tawil.

What al Bukhari meant by his statement, “They interpret it,” is that they distort the intended meaning through a form of tawil. This is like when a word in Hebrew can carry two meanings, one close and one far, while the intended meaning is the close one, so they carry it upon the far one, and similar cases.

Their Study and the Listening Ear

His statement: “Their study means their recitation.”

Ibn Abi Hatim connected it from the route of Ali ibn Abi Talhah, from Ibn Abbas. Likewise, His statement:

وَتَعِيَهَا أُذُنٌ وَاعِيَةٌ

And a listening ear may retain it. (al Haqqah 12)

He said: “Preserving.” It was said: The subtle point in mentioning the ear in the singular is to point to the small number of people who retain and understand. A weak report has been narrated that what is meant by the ear in this verse is a specific ear, namely the ear of Ali. Al Thalabi (d. 427AH) reported it from the mursal report of Abd Allah ibn al Hasan ibn al Hasan ibn Ali. In its chain is Abu Hamzah al Thumali, with dammah on the tha and a light mim. Said ibn Mansur (d. 227AH) and al Tabari also reported something similar from the mursal report of Makhul (d. 112AH). (His name is Thabit ibn Abi Safiyyah. He is a Rafidi and weak.) (Tafsir al Tabari by al Tabari, 29/255)

Whoever the Qur’an Reaches

His statement:

وَأُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ لِأُنْذِرَكُمْ بِهِ

And this Qur’an has been revealed to me so that I may warn you through it. (al Anam 19)

It means: “The people of Makkah.”

وَمَنْ بَلَغَ

And whomever it reaches. (al Anam 19)

“This Qur’an is a warning for him.”

Ibn Abi Hatim connected it with the mentioned chain to Ibn Abbas. Ibn al Tin (d. 611AH) said: His statement, “And whomever it reaches,” means: “Whomever it reaches.” The pronoun was omitted. It was also said: The meaning is: “Whoever reaches maturity.” The first is the well known view.

Ibn Abi Hatim reported in al Radd ala al Jahmiyyah by Ibn Abi Hatim from Abd Allah ibn Dawud al Khuraybi (d. 213AH), with a dotted kha, then ra, then a ba, in the diminutive form, who said: “There is no verse in the Qur’an more severe against the companions of Jahm than this verse:

لِأُنْذِرَكُمْ بِهِ وَمَنْ بَلَغَ

So that I may warn you through it, and whomever it reaches. (al Anam 19)

Whoever the Qur’an reaches, it is as though he heard it from Allah, the Most High.” (This is also in Tafsir Ibn Abi Hatim by Ibn Abi Hatim, 10/3369.)

Fath Al Bari By Ibn Hajar 24/563–572