mention the names of the hypocrites in the Quran and ask them to curse themselves, and command all other Muslims to do the same, and urge them on that day and night? Is this at all possible so as to justify that one should investigate its soundness or false‌ hood, or insist on demonstrating it by what some traditions say about the existence of the names of a number of hypocrites in the text of Ali (peace be upon him)? Can this [mention of names of the hypocrites] be analogous to the mention of Abu _Lahab [by name in the Quran], [his] having been cursed because of his associationism (shirk) and his hostility toward the Prophet, in spite of the Prophets knowledge that he would die in disbelief? Well, it is not far-fetched to maintain that the Prophet did mention the names of the hypocrites to some of his close associates, like the Amir al-Muminin [Ali] and others in his special gatherings.
To summarize, even if it is correct that there were additions in the text of Ali (peace be upon him), they were not part of the Quran, and not part of what the Messenger of God was commanded to convey to the community. To maintain, on the basis of such additions, that his text contained additional revelations is merely an opinion without evidence, and definitely it is false. All the previously discussed evi‌ dence in relation to the absence of alteration (ta/:trif) provides irrefutable proof in this connection, too.

The Third Error

According to this [error], there are uninterruptedly narrated traditions, on the authority of the Imams from ahl al-bayt, that corroborate the view that alteration of the Quran definitely took place and that, therefore, one must ac ept
The response [to this is as follows]. Surely, these traditions do not indicate that alterations have occurred in the sense of the word on which Muslims do not agree. To make this clearer, [it should be noted that] most of the traditions are appended with weak chains of transmission, having been narrated from the book of A.Qmad b. Mubammad al-Sayyan, who, according to the consensus of the scholars of biographi‌ cal dictionaries (ulama al-rijal) held corrupt beliefs and maintained a belief in metempsychosis. Others have been narrated by Ali b. A.Qmad al-Kufi, who, as re‌ ported by the scholars of biographical dictionaries, was a liar, and held false beliefs. Nevertheless, the sheer number of these traditions forces us to accept that some of them are authentic accounts related on the authority of the infallible Imams, and must, at least, be regarded with confidence. In addition, some of them have been related through credible chains of transmission. Consequently, there is no need to dwell upon the source of each tradition in particular; [instead, we shall concentrate on the con‌ tents of each tradition].

Examination of the Traditions on Tabrff

It is necessary to discuss the meanings of these traditions, and to clarify that they are not all united in purport, and that they can be divided into groups. We should there‌ fore undertake to explain the differences of purport and speak about each group of traditions in that light.