The following article is taken from the appendix of the first chapter of the book "Essence of the Holy Quran - The Eternal Light" by the same author.

After discussing in detail the views of the celebrated theologians and jurists on the genuineness of the Holy Qur'an and its authoritative status, one feels it is inevitable to remove the fallacious notions created by certain authors and a few solitary and weak traditions relating to tahrif (i.e. the distortion of the letters, words, verses or arrangement of the Qur'an). In the last two centuries of the Hijrah some traditionalists had tried to question the status of the Qur'an within the very narrow field of the sporadic traditions which are dearer to them than reason and the Qur'an.

In the beginning of the present century, the late Haji Mirza Hussain N'uri (d. 1320/1908), who belongs to this group, has written many valuable books which earned a name for him, but unfortunately his book Fasl al-Khitab, a bundle of contradictions, represents the views against the unanimous verdict of Shi'ah scholars of all centuries regarding the genuineness of the Qur'an and subjected him to the severe criticism of his contemporaries whose superiority in learning is unquestionable.

The study of the book will show that it refutes its own contentions. While he insists that the Qur'an was not put into book form as it is now, he asserts at the same time that 'Ali used to write every verse of the Qur'an with its revealed commentary and its inner significance by the order of the Holy Prophet. Here the question arises whether 'Ali's writing of the Qur'an was based on a particular order or system or was it something haphazard? Secondly, it is obvious that the the Holy Prophet's reference to the Book of God, the text of which he was leaving among the people with the Ahl al-Bayt, was in complete accord with the text which he had already dictated to 'Ali. Therefore there is no room left for the author of Fasal al-Khitab to assert that the Qur'an was not put into writing during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet. The story that 'Ali had kept himself engaged in collecting the Qur'an after the demise of the Holy Prophet is nothing but a mere fabrication of the ruling party just to give reason for 'Ali's delay in participating in the ba'yat. They wanted to prove that 'Ali thought that the collection of the Qur'an was more important than the issue of ba'yat, otherwise he was not opposed to Abu Bakr being the caliph. This baseless propaganda gave a chance to the unscrupulous traditionalist of the later period to accept the fact that the Qur'an was not collected and arranged during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet.

Another point which the author of Fast al-Khitab takes for granted is that the arrangement of the so-called collection of 'Ali was chronological. Without repeating the details which have already been discussed, it is an accepted fact that no Shi'ah traditionist has ascribed the chronological arrangement to any Imam (Masum). The first person who attributed this type of arrangement to 'Ali is Ibn Sireen whose fidelity to the Ahl al-Bayt is questionable. All that we have received from the Ahl al-Bayt are two traditions in this connection narrated by Kafi from the fifth Imam through Jaber-e Jaufi. Jaber says, "I heard that the fifth Imam Abu Ja'far used to say that excluding 'Ali ibn Abi Talib and the Holy Imams after 'Ali nobody except a liar could claim that he had collected the Qur'an as a whole as it was revealed, compiled and preserved as God has sent it down." Next to this tradition Kafi narrates through the same traditionalist Jaber from the same Imam that he (the Imam) said that except the successors of the Holy Prophet (i.e. the Imams) nobody could claim that he was in possession of the Qur'an as a whole with its outer letters (exoteric form) and inner significance (esoteric form). The second tradition from Kafi explains what the Imam meant by the word 'Qur'an as a whole' as it was narrated in the first tradition. The Imam meant that nobody except 'Ali and his successive Imams were in possession of the Holy Qur'an with both its exoteric and esoteric aspects which were revealed to the Holy Prophet and dictated to 'Ali then and there. This tradition is a general explanation for all the traditions which have been narrated from the Ahl al-Bayt giving various versions of particular verses. These particular verses are not found in the text in hand, they refer to the inner significance of the verses.

It is surprising the author of Fasl al-Khitab, in order to prove that the Qur'an in hand is not the whole one that was revealed, quotes the first tradition ignoring the second which explains the former. It is very difficult to say that the second tradition escaped his notice.

Nuri has criticized Mullah Faid-e Kashani for not narrating the tradition which states that the Qu'ran contains seventeen thousand verses and confined himself to narrating the tradition of seven thousand verses. He has boldly accused the Mullah of dishonesty. The question of the number of verses has already been discussed at length to disprove this statement. Moreover he himself cannot escape similar charges. Anyhow all his contemporaries and scholars of later periods wished that the late Nuri would not have written this book which has damaged his reputation.

We would like to point out here that Mullah Faid-e Kashani is far above any allegation and he is a link in narrating the tradition between the author of Fasl al-Khitab and the Imams. When the above author discredits Mullah Faid-e Kashani, he loses the important link