٦. A tradition was reported by Ibn Shahr Ashi.ib, going back to Abd Allah, who narrated the oration of al-I;Iusayn b. Ali on the day of Ashura, in which the Imam said, "Undoubtedly, you are the tyrants among the community, the deviates among the [Mekkan] Confederates,٣٨ the repudiators of the Book, the expectorations of the Devil, the association of the crimes, and the corruptors (muf:zarrifi) of the Book."

٧. A tradition was reported in Kamil al-Ziyarat on the authority of al-I;Iasan b. Atiyya, who related it from the Imam al-Sadiq, who said, "When you enter the sacred area around the grave [of al-I;Iusayn b. Ali at Karbala], say, "٠ God, curse those who falsified Your Prophet, and those who destroyed Your Kaba, and those who cor‌ rupted Your Book."

٨. A tradition was reported by al-I;ajal on the authority of Qutba b. Maymun, who received it from Abd al-Ala:

He [al-l.fijal] said: Aba AbdAllah [al-Sadiq] (peace be upon him) said, The speakers of Arabic altered the Speech of God from its original form."

Actual Signification of the Traditions

The response to the deductions on the basis of this group of traditions is that it is apparent from the last tradition cited that alteration here is intended [in the sense of the phonetic corruption] according to the differences among the readers, and the application of their personal judgment in the readings. This, in tum, resulted from the differences in the manner of reading while preserving the essence of the Quran and its original sense. We have already explained that alteration in this sense undoubt‌ edly occurred as a result of the fact that the seven readings were not based on unin‌ terrupted transmission. In fact, this form of taf:zrif would definitely have occurred even if the seven readings were based on uninterrupted transmission. This is because the readings were numerous, and they were based on the conjectural judgments [of the readers], which could have required them to make changes in the readings. Ac‌ cordingly, this tradition has no connection with the intention of those who maintain that alteration occurred.
A.s for the remaining traditions, their apparent meaning points to taf:zrifin the sense
of explaining the verses at variance with their actual meanings, which, in tum, goes hand in hand with denying the excellence of the Family of the Prophet (ahl al-bayt) (peace be upon them) and with displaying animosity toward them and fighting them. This explanation is explicitly supported by the attribution of taf:zrifto the killers of al-I;Iusayn b. Ali, in the oration quoted earlier.
As for the tradition noted by al-Kulayni in his al-Kafi, which was cited earlier in this chapter, the Imam al-Baqir says there: "Among their ways of repudiating the Book [of God] is that they stand by its wording, whereas they misconstrue its limits."
We have mentioned that taf:zrifin this sense has definitely occurred, and as such, it is not part of the dispute. Had such alteration not occurred, the rights of the Family would have remained unviolated and the sanctity of the Prophet in their regard would have been complied with. Nor would matters have reached the point of depriving them of their rights and hurting the Prophet through them.