Faslul Khitab
Sheikh
M. al-Khatib's second allegation concerns the book called Faslul Khitab Fi Ithbati
Tahrifi Kitabi Rabbil Arbab, by Mirza Husein at-Twabarsy.
On
page 4 of his book, Sheikh M. al-Khatib states that in Faslul Khitab there is
evidence that, according to Shia belief, there are "both additions to and
omissions from" the Qur'an . On this claim please turn to page 9-13 of this
book to see how several Shia ulamaa have rejected that theory. Please turn also
to pages 31-39 of this book to see that Sunnis subscribe to this belief as well
- and this can be seen in their main books which are relied upon as "the
most authentic after the Qur'an"! If that is the case, why should it be blamed
on Shias alone?
It is true, as Sheikh M. al-Khatib has
stated, that the book in question was published in Iran in 1298H. But it is not
true that it contains the evidence by "Shiite scholars in different eras"!
The truth is that the mentioned book includes evidences from the Sunnis as well
- and the latter in a bigger quantity!
However, what
is important here is to know that, after the publication of that book, some of
the Shia scholars wrote other books as rejoinders to it. Scholars such as Sayyid
Muhammad Hussein Shahristani in his book, Risaalatu Hifdhil Kitabis Sharifi An
Shubhatil Qawli Bit Tahrif, and Sheikh Mahmud at-Tahrani in his book, Kashful
Irtiyabi. Wasn't Sheikh M. al-Khatib aware of this?
It
should also be understood that before his death, the author of Faslul Khitab admitted
that it was a mistake to have given his book that title. He said that it would
have been better to have called it Faslul Khitab Fi Adami Tahrifil Kitab, because
in it he proved that all the chapters and verses of the Holy Qur'an, which is
available in the four corners of the world, "were a revelation from Allah,
which were tampered with neither by alterations and changes nor by additions or
omissions - since (the day) it was bound together to this day
"
But
even if we are to accept that all that is contained in Faslul Khitab is from Shia
transmissions, and even if we do not accept Sheikh at-Twabarsy's report that he
admitted to his mistake, what will Sheikh M. al-Khatib tell us concerning those
transmissions which are contained in Volume Two of al-Itqaan by Suyuti, and which
are similar to the ones in Faslul Khitab? Because of that, is he or others who
have similar views as his, prepared to judge the Sunnis in the same manner as
he did the Shias? If not, then our readers will definitely want to know why.