In one of his latest articles, ‘mis’-guided, may Allah guide him and keep us firm, called it ‘Effendi’s intellectual suicide.’

He quoted the following Ibn Haj’r’s most classical work ‘Fath ul Bari’:

وقد تأول القاضي أبو بكر الباقلاني في كتاب ‏”‏ الانتصار ‏”‏ وتبعه عياض وغيره ما حكي عن ابن مسعود فقال‏:‏ لم ينكر ابن مسعود كونهما من القرآن وإنما أنكر إثباتهما في المصحف، فإنه كان يرى أن لا يكتب في المصحف شيئا إلا إن كان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أذن في كتابته فيه، وكأنه لم يبلغه الإذن في ذلك، قال‏:‏ فهذا تأويل منه وليس جحدا لكونهما قرآنا‏.‏

وهو تأويل حسن إلا أن الرواية الصحيحة الصريحة التي ذكرتها تدفع ذلك حيث جاء فيها‏:‏ ويقول إنهما ليستا من كتاب الله‏.‏

 

Qadi Abubakr al-Baqillani has interpreted in his al-Intisar, and Iyad and others have followed him, about what is narrated from Ibn Mas’ud. He (al-Baqillani) said: “Ibn Mas’ud did not deny that both Surahs are from the Qur’an. Rather, he denied their inclusion in the Qur’anic codex. This is because it is narrated that he used not to include anything in his Qur’anic codex except after the Prophet, peace be upon him, had given permission to him to do so. It seems that the permission did not reach him (in the case of the two Surahs). Therefore, his statement is only his tawil (interpretation), and it was not rejection of their being part of the Qur’an.

(al-Asqalani says) This is a good interpretation EXCEPT THAT THERE ARE EXPLICIT SAHIH REPORTS WHICH REFUTES THE ABOVE ON ACCOUNT OF THIS PHRASE IN THEM: “HE (IBN MAS’UD) WAS SAYING: ‘BOTH SURAHS ARE NOT FROM THE BOOK OF ALLAH’”.

And also the following from Imam Nawawi:

 

Imam Nawawi said in “al-Majmoa sharhul al-mahzab” (3/396):

أجمع المسلمون على أن المعوذتين والفاتحة وسائر السور المكتوبة في المصحف قرآن. وأن من جحد شيئا منه كفر. وما نقل عن ابن مسعود في الفاتحة والمعوذتين باطل ليس بصحيح عنه

“Muslims agreed upon muawizaytan and Fatiha and other surahs which written in al-Mushaf of Quran, AND WHOEVER WOULD REJECT THING FROM IT IS KAAFIR.

 

So he felt like he did something amazing by ‘refuting’ us and making it seem as though Ibn Mas’ud RA believed in tahrif.

However the explanation our scholars give which I think he missed or didn’t see yet.

Ibn Mas’ud RA denied those two surah’s due to seeing the Prophet SAW and the companions only using it as ruqyah and he swore that he would never add something into his mushaf, until he found it to be a part of the Qur’an.

He was the one who said, ‘There is not an ayah, that I do not know when it was revealed, where it was revealed, and why it was revealed.’ So this shows he learned the usul of every verse, and it is narrated he said this after the death of the messenger SAW. And did we hear any argument against the mus-haf Zayd Ibn Thabit RA collected?

So the understanding here is that the companions all agreed on the mus-haf of Abu Bakr RA, meaning that the whole Qur’an was collected into this Book we have today. And when we refer to ‘tahrif’ it is this Book we have today, so anyone who after the agreement of the companions believe in tahreef, is surely a kaafir as stated by our fatawaa.

Imam Nawawi said in “al-Majmoa sharhul al-mahzab” (3/396):

أجمع المسلمون على أن المعوذتين والفاتحة وسائر السور المكتوبة في المصحف قرآن. وأن من جحد شيئا منه كفر. وما نقل عن ابن مسعود في الفاتحة والمعوذتين باطل ليس بصحيح عنه

“Muslims agreed upon muawizaytan and Fatiha and other surahs which written in al-Mushaf of Quran, AND WHOEVER WOULD REJECT THING FROM IT IS KAAFIR.

So I hope it is understood now. So ya misguided! Please don’t put your scholars who confused you and played with your emotions to those preserved the Qur’an for us.

And Allah knows best