Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 56

Thread: Is not the Quran a 100% preserved?

  1. #21
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Asia
    Faith
    Christian
    Posts
    118
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    10
    The youtube clip by yasir qadhi - about his attempt to justify & rationalise caliph Uthman's destruction of all the pre-existing versions of the Quran, with the one redacted and re-published by Zaid b.Thabit, whom the hadith declare is "a young muslim", is pathetic and presumptuous indeed.

    It also indisputably shows that the Quran that is floating around today, is definitely not the same as the one that supposedly was transmitted to muhamad via Angel Gabriel.

    Today, we have a quran that is the product of human editing and manual redaction. Re-published at the command of a muslim leader, that resulted from the handiwork of the editorial committee headed by one Zaid b.Thabit (a young muslim man).

    Did Allah himself command this editorial work? Did He assign the committee thru angel Gabriel and select Zaid b.Thabit for the job? Of course, NO!

    Therefore to say the quran today is the very same as that given to Muhamad, is at the best, disingenuous and fallacious. Today's Quran is the result of an Editing committee and a re-published third or fourth hand redaction, far removed from any original.




    Quote Originally Posted by 37818 View Post

  2. #22
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Asia
    Faith
    Christian
    Posts
    118
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    10
    Uthman’s innovation was to make one Qur’an for the entire Muslim world. He was not trying to preserve these differences but remove them, and this is how there came to be one Qur’an: The other versions made by the companions of Muhammad were destroyed. Even though Muhammad had commissioned several of these companions to teach the Qur’an, Uthman only kept one collection and destroyed the rest.

    A simple comparison would be if the early Christians destroyed the Gospel according to Mark, Luke, and John, and just kept Matthew. This may have made things simpler, but Christianity is richer for having preserved all these different testimonies; and Islam is poorer for having destroyed these other testimonies to the Qur’an.

    The result is that today we have only one testimony to what Muhammad recited. The testimony of these other collections has almost totally been destroyed.

    QUESTION:- Did all of the companions of the Muhammad agree with Uthman’s actions?

    No, in particular Abdullah ibn Mas’ud objected to Uthman’s actions. Abdullah ibn Mas’ud was personally commissioned by Muhammad to teach the Qur’an:

    Narrated Masruq: ... I heard the Prophet saying, "Take (learn) the Qur'an from four (men): `Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin Ka'b." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 521)
    He even recited the Qur’an to Muhammad.

    Narrated Abdullah bin Masud: The Prophet said to me, "Recite (the) Quran to me." I said to him. "Shall I recite (it) to you while it has been revealed to you?" He said, "I like to hear it from another person." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 576)

    That is, Abdullah ibn Mas’ud was authorised and commissioned by Muhammad to teach the Qur’an to others. However, Uthman did not consult Abdullah ibn Mas’ud when he made his version of the Qur’an, and Abdullah was angry about this, and also angry that Uthman wanted him to hand over his collection of the Qur’an to be destroyed. Abdullah maintained that his collection was just as valid, if not more so, that any other collection. As a result Abdullah told his students to hide their Qur’ans from Uthman.

    'Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported that he said to his companions to conceal their copies of the Qur'an and further said: He who conceals anything he shall have to bring that which he had concealed on the Day of Judgment, and then said: After whose mode of recitation do you command me to recite?

    I, in fact recited before Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) more than seventy chapters of the Qur'an and the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) know it that I have better understanding of the Book of Allah (than they do), and if I were to know that someone had better understanding than I, I would have gone to him.

    Shaqiq said: I sat in the company of the Companions of Muhammad (may peace be upon him) but I did not hear anyone having rejected that (that is, his recitation) or finding fault with it. (Sahih Muslim: bk. 31, no. 6022; also Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 522)

    Az-Zuhri also narrated that Abdullah Ibn Mas’oud became upset because he was not chosen to copy the Qur’an. He said, “Oh you Muslims, how can I not be chosen ..." Ibn Mas’oud also said, “Oh people of Iraq! Hide your Qurans in your homes (from Uthman).”
    (Sunan Al-Tirmithi, Dar Al-Kotob Al-ilmiyah, 2008, vol. 4, no. 3105, p. 134; also Ibn Sa'd, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, vol. 2 p. 444)

    Therefore, NOT ALL the companions of Muhammad agreed with Uthman’s innovation, but Uthman was able to enforce his decision and eventually all the companions had to accept this. Had Uthman not enforced his version of the Qur’an, other collections of the Qur’an could have remained until today.

    This demolishes Qadhi's theoretical propoganda that all the owners of the variant Quran manuscripts, surrendered the copies of their versions willingly to the commands of Uthman to have those different versions destroyed by burning.

  3. #23
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Asia
    Faith
    Christian
    Posts
    118
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    10
    After all this time, No participating muslim, Brother siam nor same hakeem has come forward with a rebuttal to my points, above, because they are all TRUE.

    Sourced from the authentic and original sources of orthodox islam. They cannot be seen to deny these sources, for fearof being branded and labelled as deviant and heretics!

    How tragic and sad for these Muslims..





    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
    Uthman’s innovation was to make one Qur’an for the entire Muslim world. He was not trying to preserve these differences but remove them, and this is how there came to be one Qur’an: The other versions made by the companions of Muhammad were destroyed. Even though Muhammad had commissioned several of these companions to teach the Qur’an, Uthman only kept one collection and destroyed the rest.

    A simple comparison would be if the early Christians destroyed the Gospel according to Mark, Luke, and John, and just kept Matthew. This may have made things simpler, but Christianity is richer for having preserved all these different testimonies; and Islam is poorer for having destroyed these other testimonies to the Qur’an.

    The result is that today we have only one testimony to what Muhammad recited. The testimony of these other collections has almost totally been destroyed.

    QUESTION:- Did all of the companions of the Muhammad agree with Uthman’s actions?

    No, in particular Abdullah ibn Mas’ud objected to Uthman’s actions. Abdullah ibn Mas’ud was personally commissioned by Muhammad to teach the Qur’an:

    Narrated Masruq: ... I heard the Prophet saying, "Take (learn) the Qur'an from four (men): `Abdullah bin Masud, Salim, Mu'adh and Ubai bin Ka'b." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 521)
    He even recited the Qur’an to Muhammad.

    Narrated Abdullah bin Masud: The Prophet said to me, "Recite (the) Quran to me." I said to him. "Shall I recite (it) to you while it has been revealed to you?" He said, "I like to hear it from another person." (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 576)

    That is, Abdullah ibn Mas’ud was authorised and commissioned by Muhammad to teach the Qur’an to others. However, Uthman did not consult Abdullah ibn Mas’ud when he made his version of the Qur’an, and Abdullah was angry about this, and also angry that Uthman wanted him to hand over his collection of the Qur’an to be destroyed. Abdullah maintained that his collection was just as valid, if not more so, that any other collection. As a result Abdullah told his students to hide their Qur’ans from Uthman.

    'Abdullah (b. Mas'ud) reported that he said to his companions to conceal their copies of the Qur'an and further said: He who conceals anything he shall have to bring that which he had concealed on the Day of Judgment, and then said: After whose mode of recitation do you command me to recite?

    I, in fact recited before Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) more than seventy chapters of the Qur'an and the Companions of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) know it that I have better understanding of the Book of Allah (than they do), and if I were to know that someone had better understanding than I, I would have gone to him.

    Shaqiq said: I sat in the company of the Companions of Muhammad (may peace be upon him) but I did not hear anyone having rejected that (that is, his recitation) or finding fault with it. (Sahih Muslim: bk. 31, no. 6022; also Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 522)

    Az-Zuhri also narrated that Abdullah Ibn Mas’oud became upset because he was not chosen to copy the Qur’an. He said, “Oh you Muslims, how can I not be chosen ..." Ibn Mas’oud also said, “Oh people of Iraq! Hide your Qurans in your homes (from Uthman).”
    (Sunan Al-Tirmithi, Dar Al-Kotob Al-ilmiyah, 2008, vol. 4, no. 3105, p. 134; also Ibn Sa'd, Kitab Al-Tabaqat Al-Kabir, vol. 2 p. 444)

    Therefore, NOT ALL the companions of Muhammad agreed with Uthman’s innovation, but Uthman was able to enforce his decision and eventually all the companions had to accept this. Had Uthman not enforced his version of the Qur’an, other collections of the Qur’an could have remained until today.

    This demolishes Qadhi's theoretical propoganda that all the owners of the variant Quran manuscripts, surrendered the copies of their versions willingly to the commands of Uthman to have those different versions destroyed by burning.

  4. #24
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Asia
    Faith
    Christian
    Posts
    118
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    10
    An objective and unbiased study of the Quran by historians and manuscript experts, find:-

    German academic fears a violent backlash from orthodox Muslims because of his "blasphemous" theory that the Koran has been changed and revised. Such a backlash is not to be taken lightly; the Salman Rushdie affair is a solemn reminder of the power of an angry Muslim community.

    After the author wrote his novel Satanic Verses, which was considered by Muslims to be blasphemous, a fatwa , or religious decree, was pronounced against him in 1989 that left him fearing for his life. Rushdie has only recently reappeared in public after nearly 10 years in hiding.

    According to Muslim belief, the Koran is the eternal, unaltered Word of God, which has remained the same for 14 centuries.

    But Dr Gerd R Puin, a renowned Islamicist at Saarland University, Germany, says it is not one single work that has survived unchanged through the centuries. It may include stories that were written before the prophet Mohammed began his ministry and which have subsequently been rewritten.

    Puin's conclusions have sparked angry reactions from orthodox Muslims. "They've said I'm not really the scholar to make any remarks on these manuscripts," he said.

    The semitic philologist, who specialises in Arabic calligraphy and Koranic palaeography, has been studying Sa'na manuscripts, ancient versions of the Koran discovered in Sa'na, the capital of Yemen.

    So controversial are his findings that the Yemeni authorities have denied him further access to the manuscripts.

    He says they shed new light on the early development of the Koran as a book with a "textual history", which contradicts the fundamental Muslim belief that it is the unchanging Word of God.

    Any questioning of the authenticity of the Koranic text as the Word of God can expect a hostile reaction. The fatwa , or death sentence, was issued against Rushdie for hinting in Satanic Verses that the Koran may include verses from other sources - chiefly Satan.

    Academics offering radical interpretations of the Koran put their lives at risk. In 1990, Dr Nasr Abu Zaid, formerly a lecturer in Koranic Studies at Cairo University, provoked a national outcry in Egypt over his book The Concept of the Text. There were death threats from Muslim extremists, general public harassment, and in 1995 he was branded an apostate by Egypt's highest court. The court forced him to divorce his wife because under Islamic law, marriage between an apostate and a Muslim is forbidden.

    Zaid's proposal was arguably less radical than Puin's. Zaid's book argued that "the Koran is a literary text, and the only way to understand, explain, and analyse it is through a literary approach". A Muslim, Zaid remained in Egypt for a time to refute the apostasy charges, but fled with his wife to Holland in the face of increasing death threats.

    Puin believes that he will not receive the same reaction, because unlike Zaid or Rushdie he does not have a Muslim name.

    His claim that the Koran has changed since its supposed standardisation, and that pre-Islamic texts have crept in, would nonetheless be regarded as highly blasphemous by Muslims. He has not yet written a book on his radical findings, but says it is "a goal to achieve" in the near future.

    Dr Tarif Khalidi, lecturer in Islamic Studies at Cambridge University, warns that the book may generate a controversy similar to Satanic Verses. "If Dr Puin's views are taken up and trumpeted in the media, and if you don't have many Muslims being rational about it, then all hell may break loose."

    Khalidi fears Muslims will not accept Puin's work on the Sa'na manuscripts as having been done with academic objectivity, but see it as a deliberate "attack on the integrity of the Koranic text".

    The manuscripts, thought to be the oldest surviving copies of the Koran, were discovered in the ancient Great Mosque of Sa'na in 1972, when the building was being restored after heavy rainfall, hidden in the loft in a bundle of old parchment and paper documents. They were nearly thrown away by the builders, but were spotted by Qadhi Isma'il al-Akwa, then president of the Yemeni Antiquities Authority, who saw their importance and sought international assistance to preserve and examine them.

    Al-Akwa managed to interest Puin, who was visiting Yemen for research purposes in 1979. Puin in turn persuaded the German government to organise and fund a restoration project.

    The restoration revealed that some of the parchment pages dated from the seventh and eighth centuries, the crucial first two centuries of Islam, from which very few manuscripts have survived.

    Until now, there were three ancient copies of the Koran. One copy in the Library of Tashkent in Uzbekistan, and another in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul, Turkey, date from the eighth century. A copy preserved in the British Library in London, known as the Ma'il manuscript, dates from the late seventh century. But the Sa'na manuscripts are even older. Moreover, the Sa'na manuscripts are written in a script that originates from the Hijaz - the region of Arabia where the prophet Mohammed lived, which makes them not only the oldest to have survived, but one of the earliest copies of the Koran ever.

    Puin noticed minor textual variations, unconventional ordering of the chapters (surahs), as well as rare styles of orthography. Then he noticed that the sheets were palimpsests - manuscripts with versions written even earlier that had been washed off or erased.

    These findings led Dr Puin to assert that the Koran had undergone a textual evolution. In other words, the copy of the Koran that we have is not the one believed to have been revealed to the prophet.

    Read the rest of this documentary report, here:-

    https://amp.theguardian.com/educatio...on.theguardian

    Those who seek to know the actual origins of the Quran and its development will be truly enlightened.

  5. #25
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Faith
    Muslim
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    891
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
    After all this time, No participating muslim, Brother siam nor same hakeem has come forward with a rebuttal to my points, above, because they are all TRUE.
    I have not commented because your (Western-based) research is so outdated.
    Muslims know the facts about the Quran---we do not need to rely on shoddy western scholarship especially since this is a fairly new area of scholarship for Western Academia. We Muslims are patiently waiting for Western Academia to catch up.

    As Prf Lumbard explains....

  6. #26
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Faith
    Muslim
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    891
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    36
    What happens when there are typos in the Bible?.....
    https://www.history.com/news/history...ical-misprints

    Unlike some of the other misprinted Bibles, the “Wicked Bible” was one the church actively sought to destroy for its heresy. King Charles I of England decreed in the 1630s that all copies of the edition should be burned, but at least 11 survived the purge.

    So, what makes this Bible so wicked? The main error is that it leaves out the word “not” in the Seventh of the Ten Commandments, so that it reads, “Thou shalt commit adultery”—the exact opposite of what it’s supposed to say.

  7. #27
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Asia
    Faith
    Christian
    Posts
    118
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    10
    Not really true, siam. It is not so much outdated research of the western scholarship that muslims dislike the conclusions of the scholarship of the west about the Quran.

    It is moreso that the majority of the western critical scholarship over the koran ARE NOT MUSLIMS. Hence, they do not need ro read your scripture through the eyes of faith and belief in the quran's claims and polemics.

    Rather these scholars are able to research and critically analyze your "holy book" objectively and free of religious biases.

    You still have failed to explain how come your so-called "prophet" muhamed received his alleged "revelations/wahy" in ways resembling demonic possession, loss of mind control and even epilepsy. All these episodes are actually recorded authentically in the orthodox sources of islam like the hadith, sirah and tafsir.

    None of the OT prophets ever got the word of God in the haphazard, confused and demonically influenced or even satanic ways as described in the sunnah and its orthodox sources.



    Quote Originally Posted by siam View Post
    I have not commented because your (Western-based) research is so outdated.
    Muslims know the facts about the Quran---we do not need to rely on shoddy western scholarship especially since this is a fairly new area of scholarship for Western Academia. We Muslims are patiently waiting for Western Academia to catch up.

    As Prf Lumbard explains....

  8. #28
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Faith
    Muslim
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    891
    Amen (Given)
    0
    Amen (Received)
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by Dan Zebiri View Post
    Not really true, siam. It is not so much outdated research of the western scholarship that muslims dislike the conclusions of the scholarship of the west about the Quran.

    It is moreso that the majority of the western critical scholarship over the koran ARE NOT MUSLIMS. Hence, they do not need ro read your scripture through the eyes of faith and belief in the quran's claims and polemics.

    Rather these scholars are able to research and critically analyze your "holy book" objectively and free of religious biases.

    You still have failed to explain how come your so-called "prophet" muhamed received his alleged "revelations/wahy" in ways resembling demonic possession, loss of mind control and even epilepsy. All these episodes are actually recorded authentically in the orthodox sources of islam like the hadith, sirah and tafsir.

    None of the OT prophets ever got the word of God in the haphazard, confused and demonically influenced or even satanic ways as described in the sunnah and its orthodox sources.
    Do you not remember Moses and the burning bush?...If Satan is fire than that would be a clear sign that Prophet Moses was talking to the devil!!!!---I think it is ridiculous, crazy interpretation but you seem to prefer the crazy stuff--- to each his own I suppose.....

    The revisionist school of Western Academia prefers to discard Muslim scholarship and the Quranic sciences/Quran analyses by Muslim scholars and tends to work in a vacuum. This means they often come up with absurd theories which is why they gain no respect from Muslims. If you want to do proper scholarship, all facts and research should be properly taken into account and one must not only understand the language but also read the actual text one is researching.....

  9. #29
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Asia
    Faith
    Christian
    Posts
    118
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    10
    Nice try again, but again, a futile, useless effort by siam trying to divert attention away from the dubious & demonic influences upon muhamed when he was allegedly "getting the so-called revelation" of Allah. As documented and described by the sources or orthodox islam themselves.

    This is what I actually said, - no OT prophet received God's word IN THE SAME WAY that was described about muhamed getting the wahy / "revelation" found in the hadith and sira and the "authentic sources" of islam.

    Those islamic sources make muhamed shiver and shake with epileptic fits, falling sick with fever and cold, traumatized from hearing bells ringing from nowhere, snorting loudly like a camel himself, foaming from his mouth - an epileptic sign, snoring and buzzing.

    Muhd himself worried if he was demon possesed and wondered if his followers and witnesses considered himself satanically possessed.

    Orthodox sources of islam like -

    Sahih Muslim vol.4 book 28 no.5765-5767 p.1248,

    Sahih Muslim vol.3 book 22 no.5279,

    Abu Dawud vol.2 no.2548 -2550,

    Ahmad b. Hanbal I, 34, 464, vi.163, etc.

    All these original sources of islam confirm abnormal and demonic forces upon Muhd. This is no mere misinterpretation, but are admissions of satanic forces that even muhamad and his companions admit to.

    On the other hand, the Bible never ascribed the burning bush to Satan because it was an epiphany. A divine visitation of God himself to Moses. Unlike Muhamed's encounters, This was not angel presenting himself but God's own voice speaking in the fire.

    There are no such epiphanies in Islam because an epiphany means the actual presence of God among men, on earth. The transcendence of God claimed by Sura 112: 3-4 explicitly excludes the possibility of God speaking directly to men and prophets on earth - there is "nothing like unto Allah on earth." So, it is no surprise that evil spirits, demonic jinns and satan himself were actually influencing muhamed when he thought he received so-called revelations "from God"!

    The Bible on the other hand, has no such problems. Even Jesus' title as Emmanuel is just profoundly, "GOD being with us". The Word of the living God, became flesh and lived, breathed and walked and talked among us (John 1: 1-4, 14). No problem whatsoever.

    But, even the Koran does confirm that Muhamed's revelations were satanic in nature, if muslims were to be more honest about it! Just look at sura 22/52..!

  10. #30
    tWebber
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Asia
    Faith
    Christian
    Posts
    118
    Amen (Given)
    1
    Amen (Received)
    10
    But, on the other hand, even the Koran confirms that numerous of Muhamed's revelations were satanic in nature, if muslims were to be more honest about it!

    Surah 22/52:-

    Never sent We a messenger or a prophet before thee but when He recited (the message) Satan proposed (opposition) in respect of that which he recited thereof. But Allah abolishes that which Satan proposed. Then Allah establishes His revelations. Allah is Knower, Wise.

    The above verse from the koran admits that Satan indeed succeeded to insert shaytan's (satanic) verses and words into Muhamed's revelations even while the 'angel Gabriel' was revealing the verses to Muhd!

    This shows that the Quranic revelations were indeed satanic, after all. Even though they were thought to be abrogated or cancelled by God - to purge the quran's revelations of the demonic evil contents that Satan successfully inserted into Muhamed's mind and mouth.

    Muslims and Islam both then, and now have NO WAY OF Knowing or differentiating which are the real words and verses of God from the verses which Shaitan (Satanic verses of the Quran) influenced on to Muhamed and put into him.

    If some Quranic verses could be satanic and were so-called abrogated, which are the others likewise have satanic insertions in them?

    Surah 22/52 proves that there are indeed Quran verses that were demonized, satanised and corrupted, if there were just even one verse of this satanic kind in the quran, how many more if such Quranic satanic ayats/verses exist then?

    If satan can influence one or two ayats & verses, then there are hundreds more of such in today's Quran, and there is no way of knowing which are the demonic ones from the normal ones.

    The hadith agree with the insertion of satanic verses into the koran. In the way "prophet" muhamed were getting such verses and recording them. Nothing crazy at all, but a truly sobering FACT that casts serious doubts about the purity or "sacredness" of the Koran!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •