Myth of Quran's lost verse about stoning answered. Stoning sheep / goat

نشرت بواسطة: Waqar Akbar Cheema 7:03 PM في Alleged Variants and Lost Verses , lost verse , lost verses , Qur'an Preservation and Compilation , Quran , rajm , stoning , Umar , Waqar Akbar 11 تعليقات

Christian missionaries and other anti-Islamic polemics try to question the authority of the Quran by misinterpreting the following Hadith about the punishment of stoning.
----------------"In the meantime, 'Umar sat on the pulpit and when the call makers for the prayer had finished their call, 'Umar stood up, and having glorified and praised Allah as He deserved, he said, "Now then, I am going to tell you something which (Allah) has written for me to say. I do not know; perhaps it portends my death, so whoever understands and remembers it, must narrate it to the others wherever his mount takes him, but if somebody is afraid that he does not understand it, then it is unlawful for him to tell lies about me. Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth and revealed the Holy Book to him, and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajam (the stoning of married person (male & female) who commits illegal sexual intercourse, and we did recite this Verse and understood and memorized it. 

Allah's Apostle did carry out the punishment of stoning and so did we after him. I am afraid that after a long time has passed, somebody will say, 'By Allah, we do not find the Verse of the Rajam in Allah's Book,' and thus they will go astray by leaving an obligation which Allah has revealed. And the punishment of the Rajam is to be inflicted to any married person (male & female), who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if the required evidence is available or there is conception or confession." (Bukhari, Hadith 6328) ------------------

The problem with all these anti-Islamic polemics is that they only pick up a tradition or two and base all their arguments on their own explanations not understanding that Islamic treasury of traditions is quite rich and well able to expose any self styled hallow research scholar. Let's make a detailed study of the issue at hand.

Truth about the origin of the alleged verse:

Some traditions suggest that the wording of that verse is 'When a married man or woman commit adultery stone them (to death)'. But the fact, which becomes evident looking at all the various traditions, is that this was never meant to be part of the Quran. The word 'revealed' is used about this only in a metaphorical sense. This was perhaps a verse from one of the Books of the Jews and it was not revealed as a part of the Quran but its order was upheld through revelation so it remains in place.

The following tradition recorded by Tabari in his Tafsir points to the fact that it was a part of earlier revelations.

Ibn Jarir Tabari relates in his commentary of Surah Maida in connection to the incident of stoning of Jews."
The Holy Prophet (pbuh) said to them: 'Who is the most learned of the Law among you?'. They replied, 'so and so Al-A'war (i.e. Abdullah bin Souriya)'. He was called upon and he came. So the Prophet (pbuh) said: 'Are you the most learned of the Law among them?' He said, 'Jews think so.' So the Prophet (pbuh) said to him; 'By Allah and by the Law that He gave Moses on the day at Sinai, (tell me) what you find in the Law regarding adulterers?' He said: 'O Abul Qasim (i.e. Prophet), they stone the despicable (adulterer), and make the rich (if he does it) sit on the camel, blacken his face and make him face camel's back and stone the despicable if he commits adultery with a rich woman and they do the same to her.' So (again) the Prophet (pbuh) said to him: 'By Allah and by the Law that He gave Moses on the day at Sinai, (tell me) what you find in the Law?' He started to beat around the bush and the Prophet (pbuh) urged him by Allah and by the Law that He gave Moses on the day at Sinai till he said: 'O Abul Qasim, 'When a married man or woman commit adultery stone them.' So the Prophet (pbuh) said: 'It is like that, take them (the Jews who committed adultery) and stone them.' (Tafsir Ibn Jarir Al-Tabari 10/328 Narration 11976)

Now it's clear this verse as Abdullah bin Souriya spoke is similar to a verse in the Law (i.e. Torah). Even today we can find similar injunctions in the Bible i.e. Deuteronomy 22.

Meanings of the Hadith in question:

Let it be known that in Islam revelation is not only what constitutes the Holy Quran, infact there were other revelations as well as Holy Prophet (pbuh) did not speak on his own. (Quran 53:3)

Having said this, now lets analyze the wording of the Hadith in question.

Firstly it says, 'Allah sent Muhammad with the Truth', here 'Truth' refers to all forms of revelation i.e. both Quran and Prophet's sayings. Next we read, 'and revealed the Holy Book to him', here the first word is 'and' which is used as i.e. in conjunctive sense (separating the two phrases) and it continues 'revealed the Holy Book to him' i.e. the Quran. Then it reads, 'and among what Allah revealed, was the Verse of the Rajm (stoning)', here 'what Allah revealed' includes both types of revelation and not only the Book as we again have the conjunction 'and' separating the two phrases. And we do find the 'verse' about stoning in a saying of the Holy Prophet (pbuh):
Narrated by 'Ajma, she said: I heard that Messenger of Allah say; 'When a married man or woman commit adultery stone them both to death.' (Tabarani Kabeer, Hadith 20321. Ibn Hajr graded it as Hasan in his work Muwafaqatul Khubr al-Khabr 2/304. Same is found in al-Mustadrak, 8070. Hakim classified it as Sahih. al-Dhahbi agreed with him)

It was never meant to be a part of the Quranic text:
There are more proofs that it was not at all meant to be the part of the Quranic script.

1-It is reported in a narration from Kathir bin Salt that: Zaid (b. Thabit) said: 'I heard the Messenger of Allah say, 'When a married man or woman commit adultery stone them both (to death)', (hearing this) Amr said,

'When this was revealed I came to Prophet and asked if I could write it, he (the Prophet) disliked it.' (Mustadrik Al-Hakim, Hadith 8184. Hakim called it Sahih. al-Dhahbi agreed with him)

2- About this 'verse' Kathir bin Salt says that he, Zaid bin Thabit and Marwan bin Hakam were discussing as to why it is not written in the Quranic manuscript and Umar bin Khattab was present with them and listening to their discussion he said he knew it better then them and told them that he came to Messenger of Allah and said:

"'O Messenger of Allah, let the verse about stoning be written for me.' He (the Prophet) said, 'I can't do this.'" (Sunan Al-Kubra Baihiqi 8/211 & Sunan Al-Kubra Nasai Hadith 7148. Albani (in Sahiha 6/412) said Baihiqi pointed to its authenticity)
Who could stop the Prophet (pbuh) from writing this verse in the Quran if it was supposed to be? Indeed it was not meant to be written in the Quran and that's why Holy Prophet disliked its idea of its being written down.

Why is it called a 'verse'?

Infact it was a verse from an earlier book as proved from Tabari's narration above and since its instruction was upheld through revelation so it is referred to as a 'verse' and the words 'sent down' or 'revealed' are used for it.

Is stoning (rajm) mentioned in the Quran today?
And as to Caliph Umar's statement 'the people may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah.', it only refers to categorical mentioning otherwise Quran does point to the punishment of stoning. Infact Quran 5:43-44 were revealed about punishment of stoning and the words 'Command of Allah' (v.43) and 'What Allah hath revealed' (v.44) refer to punishment of stoning. This becomes absolutely clear considering the traditions that Ibn Kathir, Tabari and Qurtubi etc. have brought in commentary to these verses.

And when Caliph Umar said, 'Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book'he perhaps only referred to verses 43-44 of Surah 5 as mentioned above. Also we need to know that the Companions of the Prophet (pbuh) used to consider something proved from Hadith as important and as authentic as being in the Quran. The following tradition testifies to it.
'Abdullah (bin Masud) said. "Allah curses those ladies who practice tattooing and those who get themselves tattooed, and those ladies who remove the hair from their faces and those who make artificial spaces between their teeth in order to look more beautiful whereby they change Allah's creation." His saying reached a lady from Bani Asd called Um Yaqub who came (to Abdullah) and said, "I have come to know that you have cursed such-and-such (ladies)?" He replied, "Why should I not curse these whom Allah's Apostle has cursed and who are (cursed) in Allah's Book!" Um Yaqub said, "I have read the whole Quran, but I did not find in it what you say." He said, "Verily, if you have read it (i.e. the Quran), you have found it. Didn't you read: 'And whatsoever the Apostle gives you take it and whatsoever he forbids you, you abstain (from it).' (59.7). She replied, "Yes, I did," He said, "Verily, Allah's Apostle forbade such things. (Bukhari, Hadith 4507)

And as we know that punishment of stoning is clearly established in Hadith so Caliph Umar's statement can well be taken on that account.

Did Caliph Umar actually think some verse was missing?
Most certainly Caliph Umar knew well and understood that the particular words 'When a married man or woman commit adultery, stone them (to death)'are not meant to be the part of the actual text of the Holy Quran. This is clear from another tradition in which he said:

"Had it not been that people would say Umar has made an addition to the Book of Allah, I would have written it on the margin of the Quran."(Musnad Ahmad Hadith 151. Ahmad Shakir classified it as Sahih)
And according to the wording in Sunan Nasai Al-Kubra Hadith 7151 , he said 'I would have written and appended it to the Quran.' 

Now idea of writing at the margin of the Quran or adding as an appendix clearly shows that he only meant to add it as side note or commentary to the Quran to tell the future generations explicitly about the punishment of stoning whom he feared rejecting this commandment and going astray.

The above detail makes it absolutely clear that never was there any verse about stoning a part of the Quranic text.

Scholars' intake:

The idea that there was never any verse on stoning revealed to be a part of the Qur'an and then abrogated is not my brainchild. Infact the above is based on Shaykh Taqi Usmani's explanation (see Takmala Fath al-Mulhim vol.2 p.354-61).

Sayyid Maududi held the same view (see his answer to the question HERE -its in Urdu)

al-Alusi quotes Ibn Humam (d. 861 A.H.) to have argued for the same (See Ruh al-M'ani 9/278)

al-Baqilani (403 A.H.) also refused to accept the idea of its once being a part of the Qur'an and then getting abrogated in his al-Intisar. Shaykh Shu'aib Arnaut quoted it in his notes to Hadith 21636 of Musnad Ahmad and seemingly agreed to it.

Moreover, this explanation puts to death all queries and questions on the issue.

The institution of Stoning (Rajm):

Regardless of the issue at hand the ruling of stoning is indeed valid. It is proved through Mutawatar Ahadith reported by around 52 companions (see Takmala Fath al-Mulhim vol.2 p.362 for all the references). The Mutawatar Ahadith decide the scope of the Qur'anic verse in Surah Nur about lashing and limit it to unmarried people. Just like Qur'an gives the general ruling that anyone who steals, man or woman, his/her hand should be amputated. The ruling is general and literally applies to a something worth a single cent even. But Mutawatir Ahadith limit it to above a certain amount.

About the narrations which say it was part of Surah Ahzab see THIS

INDEED ALLAH KNOWS THE BEST!

In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful

There was a verse that was revealed to the Prophet (ṣ) and was recited by the companions, which mentioned stoning the adulterer, but its recitation was abrogated even though its ruling remained. Some Muslims are confused about this issue. Is the Quran really missing a verse?

In reality, the ‘verse’ was something that the Prophet (ṣ) stated but which was never part of the written Quran. Stoning the married adulterer, who was seen in public by four witnesses, is part of Islamic law as established in the Sunnah.

The purpose of the law is to convey the enormity of adultery, which severs families and causes turmoil in society, but the burden of proof is so impossibly high that very few stonings ever occurred in Islamic history. In this way, the law protects society from the breakdown of public morals while at the same time includes mitigating factors to protect individuals from its abuse by tyrannical governments.

Consequently, the law was considered very important by the leading companions. Umar ibn Al-Khattab, the second rightly-guided Caliph, felt that the law of adultery was so important that he wanted to write it in the Quran, except that he did not want to add anything to the Quran.

Umar ibn Al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, said:

رَجَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَرَجَمَ أَبُو بَكْرٍ وَرَجَمْتُ وَلَوْلَا أَنِّي أَكْرَهُ أَنْ أَزِيدَ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ لَكَتَبْتُهُ فِي الْمُصْحَفِ فَإِنِّي قَدْ خَشِيتُ أَنْ تَجِيءَ أَقْوَامٌ فَلَا يَجِدُونَهُ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ فَيَكْفُرُونَ بِهِ

The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, stoned (the married adulterer), Abu Bakr stoned, and I stone. Were it not that I hate adding to the book of Allah, I would have written it in the copy of the Quran. I fear that people will come and not find it in the book of Allah, so they will disbelieve in it.

Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 1431, Grade: Sahih

In another narration, Umar said:

وَلَوْلَا أَنْ يَقُولَ قَائِلُونَ زَادَ عُمَرُ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ مَا لَيْسَ مِنْهُ لَكَتَبْتُهُ فِي نَاحِيَةٍ مِنْ الْمُصْحَفِ

Were it not that some would say Umar has added to the book of Allah what does not belong in it, I would have written it in the margins of the Quran.

Source: Musnad Aḥmad 157, Grade: Sahih

Hence, the stoning verse was never part of the official Quranic text, although some companions may have written it in the margins of their personal copies.

Umar, in fact, had asked the Prophet (ṣ) for permission to write this verse in the Quran, but he was refused.

Zaid ibn Thabit reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

الشَّيْخُ وَالشَّيْخَةُ إِذَا زَنَيَا فَارْجُمُوهُمَا الْبَتَّةَ

The married old man and old woman, if they commit adultery, then stone them irrevocably.

Umar said, “When this was revealed, I went to the Prophet and I said: Let me write it.” Shu’bah said:

فَكَأَنَّهُ كَرِهَ ذَلِكَ

It was as if the Prophet disliked that.

Source: Musnad Aḥmad 21086, Grade: Sahih

In another narration, the Prophet said:

 لا أَسْتَطِيعُ ذَاكَ

I cannot have it written.

Al-Bayhaqi comments on this statement, saying:

 فِي هَذَا وَمَا قَبْلَهُ دَلالَةٌ عَلَى أَنَّ آيَةَ الرَّجْمِ حُكْمُهَا ثَابِتٌ وَتِلاوَتُهَا مَنْسُوخَةٌ وَهَذَا مِمَّا لا أَعْلَمُ فِيهِ خِلافًا

In this, and what came before it, are evidence that the ruling of the verse of stoning is affirmed and its recitation is abrogated. This among matters of which I do not know of any disagreement.

Source: al-Sunan al-Kubrá 15553

And Al-Baqilani also comments on this incident:

إنه مما نُهيَ عن رسمه، ولو كان مما أمِرنا بإثباته لاستطاعَ أن يثبته ولم يكن لتركه

Indeed, it was among what he was prohibited to inscribe. Were we commanded to affirm it, then surely he would have been able to affirm it and he would not have left it out.

Source: al-Intiṣār 1/364

And Abu Muhammad said:

لِأَنَّ آيَةَ الرَّجْمِ إذْ نَزَلَتْ حُفِظَتْ وَعُرِفَتْ وَعَمِلَ بِهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إلَّا أَنَّهُ لَمْ يَكْتُبْهَا نُسَّاخُ الْقُرْآنِ فِي الْمُصْحَفِ وَلَا أَثْبَتُوا لَفْظَهَا فِي الْقُرْآنِ وَقَدْ سَأَلَ عُمَرُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ ذَلِكَ كَمَا أَوْرَدْنَا فَلَمْ يُجِبْهُ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إلَى ذَلِكَ

When the verse of stoning was revealed, it was memorized, acknowledged, and it was acted upon by the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, except that he did not have it written in the copies of the Quran, nor did he affirm its wording in the Quran. Umar ibn Al-Khattab asked about that, as we have related, and the Prophet did not obligate him to do it.

Source: al-Muḥallá 12/177

Therefore, the verse was ‘abrogated’ in the sense that it was no longer recited and it was never written as the Quran. The ruling of stoning still applied as part of the Sunnah. We can only speculate the wisdom behind such abrogation. Perhaps, Allah does not intend for us to focus on criminal punishments to the detriment of more important religious matters, such as the five pillars of Islam, the six articles of faith, and personal moral and spiritual development.

It is worth repeating, as we have done elsewhere, that the hudud punishments in Islamic law appear harsh on their face, but in their details they contain many mitigating factors. For example, the Prophet (ṣ) encouraged Muslims to find legitimate excuses not to apply the maximum punishments when possible.

Aisha reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said:

ادْرَءُوا الْحُدُودَ عَنْ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ فَإِنْ كَانَ لَهُ مَخْرَجٌ فَخَلُّوا سَبِيلَهُ فَإِنَّ الْإِمَامَ أَنْ يُخْطِئَ فِي الْعَفْوِ خَيْرٌ مِنْ أَنْ يُخْطِئَ فِي الْعُقُوبَةِ

Avoid applying legal punishment upon the Muslims if you are capable. If the criminal has a way out, then leave him to his way. Verily, it is better for the leader to make a mistake forgiving the criminal than it is for him to make a mistake punishing the innocent.

Source: Sunan al-Tirmidhī 1424, Grade: Sahih

Thus, it became a principle of Islamic law that any doubt in the prosecution’s case would waive the maximum punishment.

As-Suyuti writes:

القاعدة (في الفقه) الحدود تسقط بالشبهات

A principle of law states that legal punishments are suspended by doubts.

Source: al-Ashbāh wal-Naẓāʼir 2/122

As such, the correct approach to this issue is to maintain the validity and importance of the hudud punishments as social statements against the worst forms of crime, but along with all of their mitigating factors which greatly reduce the likelihood of their application. This is how we can understand the verse of stoning, and maybe it is the reason why it was never written in the Quran to begin with.

Success comes from Allah, and Allah knows best.

-----------------

Myth of Qur'anic verses eaten by a goat / sheep

نشرت بواسطة: Waqar Akbar Cheema 11:42 AM في Alleged Variants and Lost Verses , Breastfeeding , Qur'an Preservation and Compilation , Quran. goat. eat , stoning , suckling , ten , verses 11 تعليقات

Using a report from Sunan Ibn Majah the Christian missionaries allege that some verses of the Qur’an were lost as they were eaten by a goat. Let’s analyze the narration and try to find out the truth.

The narration goes as;

عن عائشة قالت لقد نزلت آية الرجم ورضاعة الكبير عشرا ولقد كان في صحيفة تحت سريري فلما مات رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وتشاغلنا بموته دخل داجن فأكلها

Reported 'Aisha (RA): ‘the verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times was revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) expired and we were occupied by his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper.’ (Sunan Ibn Majah, Hadith 1944)

1- Authenticity of the narration:

Whenever we have a narration we ought to see whether it is authentic or not? The narration infact has some problems.

The particular chain given in Sunan Ibn Majah finds one of the narrators Muhammad bin Ishaq narrating it using the word عن ('an) which is rather an ambiguous way of narration and renders the narration weak when used by a narrator known for practicing Tadlis [practice of subtly missing a link] and Muhammad Ibn Ishaq is indeed such a narrator. Thus through particular chain of narration in Sunan Ibn Majah the narration is weak and unauthentic due the above mentioned defect though it has other issues as well as mentioned in the lines to follow. This is clarified by Shaykh Muhammad Taqi Usmani in Takmala Fath Al-Mulhim 1/69 pub. Darul Ahya Al-Turath Al-Arabi, Beirut.

In Musnad Ahmad the same narration is given through the same chain but with an explicit way of narration i.e. it does not have the defect like the narration in Ibn Majah’s collection. But the narration is exposed to more criticism because many other narrators have related from 'Aisha (RA) about the suckling/breastfeeding but no one has narrated the words found in this chain even though the narrators in those cases are more reliable and consistent than Muhammad bin Ishaq. And due to thefact of these words being narrated solely by him and in defiance to other much more reliable narrators, scholars have questioned its authenticity. Shaykh Shu’aib Arnaud has classified it as Da’if in his classification of Musnad Ahmad. See Musnad Ahmad 6/269 Hadith 26359.

2- The narration no way questions Qur’an infallibility:

Even if the narration were authentic it no way questions the claim of Qur’an being totally preserved and here are my evidences for this;

1- One of the two allegedly lost verses as per this narration was about stoning i.e. punishment of married adulterers. But other narrations prove that a commandment was revealed about stoning but the Holy Prophet (PBUH) did not allow it to be written as a part of the Qur’an implying that it was not meant to be Qur’an integral part. Following narrations testify to this;

a-It is reported in a narration from Kathir bin Salt that: Zaid (b. Thabit) said: 'I heard the Messenger of Allah say, 'When a married man or woman commit adultery stone them both (to death)', (hearing this) Amr said,

فقال عمرو : لما نزلت أتيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقلت : أكتبها ؟ فكأنه كره ذلك

'When this was revealed I came to Prophet and asked if I could write it, he (the Prophet) disliked it.' (Mustadrik Al-Hakim, Hadith 8184. Hakim called it Sahih)

b- About this 'verse' Kathir bin Salt says that he, Zaid bin Thabit and Marwan bin Hakam were discussing as to why it is not written in the Quranic manuscript and Umar bin Khattab was present with them and listening to their discussion he said he knew it better then them and told them that he came to Messenger of Allah and said:

يا رسول الله أكتبني آية الرجم قال فأتيته فذكرته قال فذكر آية الرجم قال فقال يا رسول الله أكتبني آية الرجم قال لا استطيع ذاك

"'O Messenger of Allah, let the verse about stoning be written for me.' He (the Prophet) said, 'I can't do this.'"(Sunan Al-Kubra Baihiqi 8/211 & Sunan Al-Kubra Nasai Hadith 7148. Albani (in Sahiha 6/412) said Baihiqi pointed to its authenticity)

Had it meant to be a part of the Qur’an why would Holy Prophet (PBUH) dislike its being written and who could stop him from doing it?

2- The second allegedly lost verse was about suckling of an adult ten times but in this case too we have other narrations which categorically say that the verse was abrogated. And interestingly those narrations come through 'Aisha (RA) only. In Sahih Muslim we read;

عَنْ عَائِشَةَ أَنَّهَا قَالَتْ كَانَ فِيمَا أُنْزِلَ مِنْ الْقُرْآنِ عَشْرُ رَضَعَاتٍ مَعْلُومَاتٍ يُحَرِّمْنَ ثُمَّ نُسِخْنَ بِخَمْسٍ مَعْلُومَاتٍ فَتُوُفِّيَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَهُنَّ فِيمَا يُقْرَأُ مِنْ الْقُرْآنِ

'A'isha (Allah be pleased with, her) reported that it had been revealed in the Holy Qur'an that ten clear sucklings make the marriage unlawful, then it was abrogated (and substituted) by five sucklings ... (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2634)

This narration explicitly says that verse about ten sucklings was abrogated. For further queries about this issue and the narration from Sahih Muslim see THIS.

Having known that neither of them was meant to be part of the Qur’an; even if we accept the narration in question we will have to say that perhaps 'Aisha (RA) had kept them with her as a historical record and nothing more. Thus even if the goat actually ate them up no part of the Qur’an was lost.

Moreover 'Aisha (RA) lived through the whole period of Qur’an compilation during the time of Abu Bakr (RA) and Usman (RA) while she was unanimously considered an authority for herself so if she had any thought about some verses missing she would have brought it to attention of other Companions of the Prophet (PBUH). Infact we have evidence of Usman (RA) making special endeavor of consulting 'Aisha (RA) and her records for verifying the official compilation. See Ibn Shabba’s Tarikh Al-Madinap.997. Despite all this she never raised the issue supporting our conclusion that no part of the Qur’an was lost even if the narration is considered reliable.

Indeed Allah Knows the best!

(This Academic Paper is Taken from "Let me Turn the Tables" website)

-------------

The Quranic Verse On Stoning

By

Bassam Zawadi

Note: FIRST READ THIS ARTICLE (*)

Some of the hadith that talk about the verse on stoning...

Saheeh Bukhari 

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 816:Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him."

Saheeh Muslim
Book 017, Number 4194:'Abdullah b. 'Abbas reported that 'Umar b. Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad (may peace be upon him) with truth and He sent down the Book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and, after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning, I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the Book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah's Book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or it there is pregnancy, or a confession.

Christian missionaries tend to argue that this verse was removed from the Quran and they claim that this is proof that Muslims corrupted the Quran. Let's see if this argument holds any water. 

The alleged verse is...

الشيخ والشيخة إذا زنيا فارجموهما البتة                                                                                                                

The old man and the old lady if they committed adultery then stone them 

Another opinion is that it is...

الشيخ والشيخة إذا زنيا فارجموهما البتة نكالا من الله والله عزيز حكيم                                                                                

The old man and the old lady if they committed adultery then stone them as a punishment from Allah and Allah is the Most Mighty, Most Wise 

Imam ibn Hajar Al Asqalani says in his commentary on Saheeh Bukhari...

فقال عمر : لما نزلت أتيت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقلت أكتبها ؟ فكأنه كره ذلك , فقال عمر : ألا ترى أن الشيخ إذا زنى ولم يحصن جلد , وأن الشاب إذا زنى وقد أحصن رجم                                                                                                               

Umar said: "When this verse came down I approached the Prophet peace be upon him so I asked him: Should I write it down?' It is as if he hated that" Then Umar said: "Cant you see that if the old man if he commits adultery he does not get the whip, and that if the young man if he commits adultery he gets stoned?" (Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani, Fathul Bari, Kitab: Al Hudood, Bab: Al I'tiraaf bil Zina,Commentary on Hadith no. 6327, Source)

Here we clearly see that the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not want the verse to be written down because it was never meant to be part of the text of the Quran. The scholars of Islam are unanimous that the recitation of this verse has been abrogated but its ruling still remains in effect. 

However, the only reason why Umar got emotional and wanted to put the verse in the Quran was because he was afraid that one day people would think that its ruling had been cancelled. However, the companions did not allow him to because they all knew that its recitation had been abrogated. In order to put a verse in the Quran there needed to be two witnesses and Umar was all by himself. Umar himself knew that its recitation was abrogated but he was getting emotional, for he feared that people in the future would not believe in the ruling of stoning the adulterers. 

Imam ibn Hajar Al Asqalani has in his commentary...

أي في الآية المذكورة التي نسخت تلاوتها وبقي حكمها , وقد وقع ما خشيه عمر أيضا فأنكر الرجم طائفة من  الخوارج أو معظمهم وبعض المعتزلة                                                                                                                        

In the verse whose recitation has been abrogated but its ruling remained, and it has happened what Umar feared. A tribe from the Khawarij or most of them and some of the Mu'tazilites rejected the stoning.

وقد أخرج عبد الرزاق والطبري من وجه آخر عن ابن عباس أن عمر قال " سيجيء قوم يكذبون بالرجم "                                   

And it was reported by Abd al Razzaq and Al Tabari from another view that Ibn Abbas said that Umar said "There will come a people that will lie (or disbelieve) in the stoning" (Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani,Fathul Bari, Kitab: Al Hudood, Bab: Rajam Al Hublah min Zana Eezha Ahsanat, Commentary on Hadith no. 6328, Source)  

Imam Nawawi says in his commentary in Saheeh Muslim...

وهذا مما نسخ لفظه وبقي حكمه                                                                                                                             

And this is whose recitation has been abrogated and its ruling remained. 

 وفي ترك الصحابة كتابة هذه الآية دلالة ظاهرة أن المنسوخ لا يكتب في المصحف , وفي إعلان عمر بالرجم وهو على المنبر  وسكوت الصحابة وغيرهم من الحاضرين عن مخالفته بالإنكار دليل على ثبوت الرجم                                                            

And the companions of the Prophet abandoning the writing of this verse is clear evidence that the abrogated should not be written in the Quran and that Umar's statement about the stoning as he is on the pulpit and the silence of the companions and other than them from who were present from opposing him is evidence about the ruling of the stoning (still being implemented) (Imam Nawawi, Sharh Saheeh Muslim, Kitab: Al Hudood, Bab: Rajam Al Thayb fil Zina, Commentary on Hadith no. 3201,Source)

Al Sindi says in his commentary on Sunan Ibn Majah...

أي آية الرجم وهذه الآية مما نسخ لفظها وبقي حكمها                                                                                                  

The verse of stoning: Its recitation has been abrogated and its ruling still remains in effect. (Al Sindi,Sharh Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab: Al Hudood, Bab: Al Rajam, Commentary on Hadith no. 2543,Source)

Muhammad Shams al-Haqq al-Adhim Abadi says in his commentary on Sunan Abu Dawud...

وهذا مما نسخ لفظه وبقي حكمه                                                                                                                          

And this is whose recitation has been abrogated but ruling remains in effect. (Muhammad Shams al-Haqq al-Adhim Abadi, Awn al-Mabud Sharh Sunan Abu Dawud, Kitab: Al Hudood, Bab: Fil Rajam, Commentary on Hadith no. 3835, Source)

Conclusion

We can clearly see that there was a consensus amongst the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the scholars that the recitation of the verse on stoning was abrogated and that they did not corrupt it. How can all the companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) who sacrificed everything they had for this religion just happen to decide to come together and purposely corrupt the Quran by removing this verse? What motive would they have in doing so if its law was to remain being implemented? So there can't be a motive to remove this verse simply because they wished to not follow its ruling since the ruling still remains in effect up to this day.

So clearly the evidence shows that this recitation was always meant to be abrogated while its ruling remains in effect.

-------------------------------

‘Abdur-­Rahman bin ‘Awf narrated that 'Umar bin al Khattab رضي الله عنه addressed the people and he heard him say:

Some people say: what is this stoning? ín the Book of Allah it mentions flogging.But the Messenger of Allah ﷺ stoned [adulterers] and we stoned [them] after him. Were it not that some people would say that 'Umar added something to the Book of Allah that is not part of it, I would have written it the way it was revealed.

حَدَّثَنَا هُشَيْمٌ، حَدَّثَنَا الزُّهْرِيُّ، عَنْ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ عُتْبَةَ بْنِ مَسْعُودٍ، أَخْبَرَنِي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ عَبَّاسٍ، حَدَّثَنِي عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ عَوْفٍ، أَنَّ عُمَرَ بْنَ الْخَطَّابِ، رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ خَطَبَ النَّاسَ فَسَمِعَهُ يَقُولُ أَلَا وَإِنَّ أُنَاسًا يَقُولُونَ مَا بَالُ الرَّجْمِ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ الْجَلْدُ وَقَدْ رَجَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَرَجَمْنَا بَعْدَهُ وَلَوْلَا أَنْ يَقُولَ قَائِلُونَ أَوْ يَتَكَلَّمَ مُتَكَلِّمُونَ أَنَّ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ زَادَ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ مَا لَيْسَ مِنْهُ لَأَثْبَتُّهَا كَمَا نُزِّلَتْ‏.‏

Grade:

Sahih (Darussalam) [ al-Bukhari (2462) and Muslim (1691)} (Darussalam)

Reference	: Musnad Ahmad 197
In-book reference	: Book 2, Hadith 114