@Jean Belmondo Like JC, Mo's existence really is not historically supported. Mecca historically did not exist in the geographical location it does today or perhaps at all. So .... "Can we even be sure Muhammad would recognise islam today?" you might be asking something like if fictional Harry Potter would recognize the narrative of the fictional Goblet of Fire.
@David Ward Are we still talking about mythologies like prophets and "all knowing god" in 2019?!! Surprising. I'm not at all interested in the theological (ie., mythological) part of the discussion. That's for brainwashed religious people. I'm only interested in the historicity. That said, I'm almost certain that muhammad never existed.
I love Gabriel Said Reynolds, but the notion of an Uthmanic recension seems to be a mythic thing, really. At the time of Uthman there was no Islamic state, and no Islam as such. The "Umma" was a loose collection of believers, a group which included Jews and Christians. And this fact is backed up by the Constitution of Medina - the only 7th century Islamic document (other than the Qur'an) to have survived till today. It is more likely that the early 20th century scholar Paul Casanova had it right when he dated the collection of the Qur'an to Abd el Malik's reign (685 - 705 CE). Abd el Malik - the first ruler to actually call himself "Caliph" - was also credited with the Qur'an's standardisation, sending his governor Al Hajjaj Ibn Yusuf to burn "errant" copies of it. Why would he have needed to do this if Uthman had supposedly already done it 40 years earlier? A great video from Abdullah S. anyway. And it is also great to see Abdullah Gondal break down the individual variants for Arabic speakers. How the "never-been-changed" mantra has survived for so long is mind-boggling to me.
this is not an interesting area of development this is an area known by muslim scholarship for more than a 1,400 years prompted by Muhammad sanctioning of the 7 different modes of transmission based on the 7 major dialects spoken by the arabs ………………...nothing changes if I say.....………...it was late AND DARK OUTSIDE...………..or...………………..it was night and dark outside...……………...as opposed to jesus being taken by the devil to the temple first then to the mountain ……….or ........to the mountain first then the temple clear difference that changes the dynamic........................let me know when skakespeare should be dug up and burned at the stake ..........lol
how lay people become internet scholars on all subjects is one of the DRAW backs of this information age INFORMATION GIVEN LEGITIMACY BASED ON PRECONCIEVED NOTIONS BEING JUSTIFIED is in and of itself contrary to the definition of knowledge and well founded understanding and solid conclusion . the sciences of the ulam of quran its COMPILATION ITS ORTHOGRAPHY and the science of contributors of its development is a detailed data base greater than that of the...….mosad…..cia.………...and f.b.i combined minus computers do u understand the significance of this we know the difference between 2 different contributors of quran who might have lived at the same time and who had the exact same first and last names WHERE ALL AS IT RELATES TO THEM PERSONALLY AS INDIVIDUALS IS KNOWN this by itself is a separate science in the scholarship of quran and HADITH a science independent and unto itself again without the benefit of computers all on dedication commitment supported by other men providing a system on internal checks and preservation of authenticity innate in there field …….SOME OF THE COMMENTS U READ BY ASSHOLES WHO THINK THEMSELVES 99 CENT SCHOLARS with a prejudice degree from the internet amaze me they have only a committed SCHOLARSHIP TO DELUSION justified in prejudice and the ignorance that feeds it , these so called lovers of so called freedom personally encarserating themselves away from the knowledge that defines the freedom they say they cherish . …….read some of the shit here its people confident in the benefit of ignorance
some of these cognitive deficient individuals might be former muslims who partake in the kind of anti-Islamic propaganda that feeds HATRED and to some degree policy THAT MAY BE DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE 4 ECONOMIC policy AND DIRECT PHYSICAL HARM BEING DONE TO ONE OR MORE OF THERE OWN STILL MUSLIM FAMILY MEMBERS still living in there countries of there own ethnic origin AND THE POSSIBLE PHYSICAL HARM DONE TO THOSE WHO HAVE MIGRATED TO THE WEST there culpability is direct because they are used as proof pawns to justify the prejudice of non muslim antagonist giving them the ultimate stamp of legitimacy TO DO AS THEY WILL ……………………..is it any wonder why in the Abrahamic traditions death 4 apostacy is law as is a traitor in secular society ………………….the bible in duet.13 calls not only for death 4 the apostate but the mass MURDER OF ALL WHO LIVE WHERE HE CAME FROM...……………….contemplate that...………….for me fuck um leave alone u can not kill WHAT is not living
@@TheFateofFaith You are right Malik. Islam is a form of christianity, that's why death for apostasy is still in islam. BTW, islam is non trinitarian christianity and muhammad most probably never existed.
These are not the first texts to have their wrings revealed by u.v. light. Ground penetrating radar has also revealed many ancient towns and cities. Ancient texts are also being rapidly put online and available to all. We are very lucky to be living in an age where history isn't as good at keeping secrets. I do wonder though, would things like this get revealed sooner if Gulf State royalty was not donating so many millions to western universities, particularly with regard to Middle East Studies and Islamic Studies.
+Muhammed Asghar Dharani LOL! Everything with Muslims ends up becoming an insulting sexual comment! You have been lied to by your Imams, Clerics and Scholars. They all know that Islam is fake. Only a complete idiot would not realize this after spending an hour or two studying Islam. Time for all Muslims to leave Islam. Just leave it. It's fake. If you believe that there is a God then you really need to leave it because the real God is going to burn you in hell for all eternity for following the commands in the Quran. You don't require belief in science. Everything has been proven to be true.
+Muhammed Asghar Dharani If it's so real then I'm sure you will be able to give me the GPS coordinates for the location of the muddy spring that the sun sets into? If you can't then you have to leave Islam because it is fake. The Quran has Allah saying that Dhul Quarnayn went so far west that he found the place where the sun sets. The Quran also says that the sun runs on to its resting place. The Hadith says that this resting place is under Allah's throne where it prostrates until given permission to rise again. The Hadith also has Mohammed telling a Muslim that the sun sets in a muddy spring. So I'm sure that you've got the coordinates because if you don't then both the Quran and Hadith was written by idiots.
+Muhammed Asghar Dharani History of al-Tabari, Vol 1- General Introduction and from the Creation to the Flood (trans. Franz Rosenthal, State University of New York Press, Albany 1989), pp. 231-237: this is (meant by) God's word: "He found it setting in a muddy spring," meaning by "muddy (hami'ah)" black clay - and 180 springs in the east likewise of black clay, bubbling and boiling like a pot when it boiled furiously. He continued. Every day and night, the sun has a new place where it rises and a new place where it sets
It would be great if they let scientists compare the Sanaa quran with the manuscript they found in Birmingham a few years ago... but I read they won’t do that
Tanja Van Kessel They have carbon dated it and run it under ultra-violet light. They haven’t found any under-writing. I’m confident that whatever options they have to study it they will use.
JE Hoyes As I understand it, they can only carbondate the skin or parchment or whatever it’s written on, not the ink. So it will always be hard to come to clear conclusions.
U just have no idea so thts just obvious u dont have to question ur self ur god is bkack stone the one u pray in 5times aday the one u bleave it can clear ur danbi or dirtiness islam is just arab paganism before islam so mohamed make them abook thts all
@@9isy7y you remember the convert that tried to fix the number 19 miracle that did not work by excluding some verses from the quran? He got a fatwa to his name for modifying the quran and was shot dead within a week. Google and read the news story if you haven't heard about it. I think that's a good hint to skip any numerological properties of the quran as they aren't there when you look for them, and the search for them can get you killed.
@@NomenNescio99 I remember him. His name was Rashad Khalifa and he wasn't a convert. Anyway, I studied this whole 19 thing as well as other numerical properties of the Quran and it's real. No human can produce such a phenomenon. It's a great sign from God for our generation.
What you have shown to us is not diferent version. And It do not change what is mean. Because they still speak on same issues with same senses. Perhaps they where some forgetfulness but not contradiction. That why they decide to rewrite it again
@Yousef Ghaneemah What you have shown to us is not diferent version. And It do not change what is mean. Because they still speak on same issues with same senses. Perhaps they where some forgetfulness but not contradiction. That why they decide to rewrite it again
Yousef Ghaneemah I as a Hindu can understand where you are coming from. I agree with you that Quran was written by humans. I also agree some Muslims follow Islam without any logic. What’s the point in hiding hairs with hijaab when the Muslim girls wear skinny jeans?
Very perfect simplicity in the presentation. You will find the same things in my son’s note book for learning Quran. If he was using a old animal skin they will consider this as the early version of the Quran. So simple.
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn. And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
The Sanaa Manuscript were most likely notes, as there is the text “do not recite Bismillah here” in the undertext. It was most likely someone studying the Quran and putting notes. There are no core differences between Sanaa Manuscripts and Quran we read today, except for different prefixes and pronouns here and there, which is a result of different accents and methods used to recite the Quran. The meaning has not changed. It was somebody taking notes and learning.
I tend to disagree with what you are saying. We can generally agree that the Ahadeeth was written by men who were born in East Iran, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan and most likely never went to Mecca. These canonised folk worked out of Baghdad and wrote the Ahadeeth 200 to 300 years after the event. In other words, they wrote them in the 8th, 9th, and 10th Centuries. If as the Ahadeeth appears to simply be a creation of man why cannot the Quran have simply been a work in progress by man? I think the argument that it was simply note taking is a real stretch but I can understand why you would say that.
Sir, you clearly took a step in the direction of learning about the compilers of ahadeeth, but I believe in your research you missed out on a key component on the system of verification of ahadeeth (plural for hadith). All ahadeeth that are labeled as authentic must go through a rigouris and strict process of authentificatiom word for word from many sources, in which the exact account of all of those who were there matches up, any slight difference and the narration is perceived as inauthentic. These man compiled and studied ahadeeth not only in Baghdad but traveled the Muslim world collecting ahadeeth from only reliable sources. You may disagree with me, but it is jsut as or even more reliable than any modern form of university level research that we read from our text books. I don't want to play the role of a scholar, as I am not, but that is my limited information on this subject and I cannot recall details that I am not 100% sure fo on the subject.
Asma Hilali has argued that the lower text of the palimpsest might have actually been a student exercise book, in an attempt to explain the many differences to the standard Uthmanic text. However, leading Quranic manuscript expert Hythem Sidky refers to a paper by Nicolai Sinai for "criticism of her reading of the lower text and overall thesis" and to a paper by another Quranic manuscript expert, Éléonore Cellard, "for a codicological reconstruction of portions of the undertext demonstrating the document’s status as a codex and the product of professional scribes". For these reasons Hilali's thesis is now widely considered to be completely untenable.
During the time of Uthman, arabs controlled at least 9 provinces. And the hadiths say one uthmanic quran was sent to each province. Today there is no original uthmanic quran, not even a copy of it or even a copy of a copy of a copy.
And the earliest fragment of the New Testament is a credit card sized piece of the Gospel of "John", likely more than 175 years after the events it described, written anonymously. The Birmingham Manuscript coincides with the lifetime of the Prophet, and was likely produced shortly after the Uthmanic standardization. Probably around 650 CE, or around 30 years max after the death of the Prophet. I can read it in the original Arabic, even without vowel marks and it is identical to the Qur'an in its current form.
the type of variations strongly suggests that the lower text was some kind of a school practice of memorization. Substituting a word with a synonym, spelling mistakes, clause order, different grammatic structure that produces the same meaning...etc. Those are signs of false recollection of memory. When I heard about the variation of Sana'a Manuscript I was very excited I thought the variations will be of a legal or political kind that the political power added or omitted to serve their current agenda. But all the variations that I have read (around 30 ) have "false memory collection" written on them. Plus the handwriting is that of an amateur. Having said that, I could be wrong but I genuinely believe that this is the most likely theory.
@Last Shadow, the chapter 9 of the Quran doesn’t start with name of Allah as all the rest of the chapters. In the lower text there was note written at the top that said do not recite Bidmillahi . That alone indicated that it was a student’s notes as you opined
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn. And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
@@alhassangangu4357 Quran Chapter 2:2 That the book no doubt in it, a guidance for the God -Conscious. ////// Now please explain where is the answer here. Chapter 2:2 does not state which book the the author is talking about. The author of the Koran is so useless that he doesn't mention which book he is talking about. Criminal translators translate it to mean "We have sent it" whereas the line mentions neither Allah nor the Koran. Translators have fooled you as well.
I would love to see you debate these dawah guys from speakers corner because this would open up the eyes of many Muslims who still believes in the lies that the Quran has never been changed.
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn. And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
@Zack Smith Zack, you NEED him to be a liar because what he is saying absolutely DESTROYS your religion! I am sorry it is so hard to come out of Islam and find the REAL God, YHWH. Jesus is the human manefestation of God's Words. Jesus is the PHYSICAL presence of God who is not DEAD. Even your Qur'an says Jesus didn't die!! Why IS THAT? Because it is TRUE! Jesus, the body God dwelt in is still ALIVE. Worship a living God Zack!
@Zack Smith So far he's presenting evidence and you are making unsubstantiated accusations. You don't come out as the trustworthy one in that comparison.
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn. And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
@@inquisitivemind007 Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn. And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
"O, believers! Whoever among you abandons their faith, Allah will replace them with others who love Him and are loved by Him. They will be humble with the believers but firm towards the disbelievers ..." 5:54 -God
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. Corinthians 6:9-11 You shall not make idols for yourselves or erect an image or pillar, and you shall not set up a figured stone in your land to bow down to it, for I am the Lord your God.” Leviticus 26:1 You must not worship your black stone or your cube pagan. You must worship your Lord JWHW stop worshipping the many gods and the idols of islam and worship the god who spoke to Moses and save your mortal soul. Black stones will not save you.
@@rickrozen2341 It's a case of swapping the threats of one religion for those of another. People would just be jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
@@rickrozen2341 You know full well that you worship a man, and Muslims worship He who created Jesus, and his mother Mary, and the rest of the Universe. No Muslim has ever worshipped a cube or a stone, just as Jews do not worship a wall or a temple.
Nestorian Christianity was prevalent in the Middle East before Islam. Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia and Persia had many Nestorian Christians. Nestorianism differs from other Christian groups, but Islam share some ideas with it. It is telling that the version of Christianity that share most with Islam is the one that was already common in the Middle East before Muhammed.
Abdullah asks: "Is this just a bad copy?" Well, if you spent a few minutes to actually go the notes provided by those that conducted the study you would realize that it is a terrible copy. Refer to page 61 of the study that quotes verses from Surat Al-Tawba. On this page alone, we can find three catastrophic mistakes. 1- Verse 81 says: Al-Naru Jahannam النار جهنم (instead of Naru Jahannam). This is grammatically incorrect. 2- Verse 85 is completely missing. 3- Verse 88 says: Wa 'ula'ika huwa al-muflihoon وأولئك هو المفلحون (instead of وأولئك هم المفلحون). Again, a major grammatical mistake. Furthermore, variants in the works that existed pre-Uthman are preserved in works of Tafseer and other Qur'anic studies works. So, no, there is not shady conspiracy theory here that scholars have been hiding.
Now, how could the variant of a burnt work be preserved after they were burnt? Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people (Muslims) of Syria and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia and Azarbaijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the Muslims of Syria and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. ... (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 510)
@@djaelanid1923 I am capable of understanding the written word and I am horrified with what I have found, can you tell me are you someone who would murder your mother, father, brother or sister if they were to reject the teachings of islam?.
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn. And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
Subhan Allah. If anything, the Sanaa Manuscripts has increased my belief in this true religion. I havent yet read what authentic scholars has said about these minor differences that you referred to which do not change the meaning whatsoever but I would imagine that part of the reason why Othman has ordered the destruction of all other manuscripts is to make sure that all muslims have the only authentic version of the Quran after he has done a significant effort in checking all the available written or memorised scripts. Some people would try their best to try to poke holes in the religion of God but Allah is preserving his Deen till the day of judgement. Allah says "translated to english" (Their intention is to extinguish Allah's Light (by blowing) with their mouths: But Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).)
By God, This Increased my faith, every person is not qualified for perfect memorization so like the above the writer he/she Misses some words. And THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT USMAN (r.a) observed and took an action.
When Uthman ask to write the Qur'an in Quraish dialect, He form the Council which lead by Zaid and all the hufaz were called to confirm the right wahyu . The hufaz had recite in front of Prophet Muhammad saw. No doubt and history has shown it. Only the blind cannot see and the deaf cannot hear.
Finding ancient manuscripts is very interesting, particularly for those with an interest in history. But as to whether the Koran is the word of a god, surely anyone who believes must ask, is this the best a GOD can do? And, what level of maturity was responsible for the weird, wacky and downright nasty bits? If you are brought up in a religion I can understand the difficulty in being objective, rather than always simply defending your beliefs and culture. But away from other believers, in those quiet times when alone, a mind that is not afraid must ask some very serious questions, including about the nature of belief itself.
Yes, imagine a university receiving millions from arab countries, would they publish and be damned, or keep anything their donors would not like under wraps.
That's why they need to spread fear to everyone. You question it (their book content), honor killer or dead sentence fatwa will come to you. This cult is too dangerous...
some people outwardly looks like Muslims,but ALLAH left them long time ago,and they dont realize it,and even dont see that they became enemies of ALLAH and His Prophet (saw).these people are examples of a living body and a dead heart.May ALLAH protect us from HIS enemies. AAMIN
2:106 We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent? We call it naskh al-tilawa . Then the Prophet memorizes the Quran. Jibril re-memorizes the Qur'an every year. And the companions memorize the Koran . It is impossible to lose a verse unless allah is the cause
Just add to this discussion, first I really appreciate this video since things like these aren't in consciousness of public usually. But I think we should be careful/cautious to reach conclusions. Birmingham Quran Manuscript is currently believed to be the oldest Quran in the world (Sana's Manuscript used to considered the oldest Quran until 2015). Though Birmingham Quran Manuscript only consists of two leaves of parchment that are a fragment of an early Quranic manuscript dated between 568 AD - 645 AD. Researchers at the University of Birmingham in England dated the parchment to within a 95.4% accuracy. Just to mention it has the same text as standard Uthman''s Quran. Plus it doesn't have any lower-text like it's found in Sana'a's manuscript. Now, note analysis of Sana'a's manuscript Indicated that the old parchment had a 95% probability of belonging to the period between 578 CE and 669 CE. We can't have exact dates for both of these manuscripts, unless we analysis inks but that would be really difficult to carbon-date because it's sure to be contaminated by parchment's content hence can give wrong values. --- Also to mention, there're were copies of Quran most notable those of "Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy b. Ka'b". And they had slight variations but research points out these were personal copies of Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy b. Ka'b and they didn't intend to show them to public hence had written certain verses into text of Quran. These "certain verses" were actually lines/prayers Prophet Muhammad used to make for example before prayer which also appear in certain Hadiths. That means Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy b. Ka'b had added personal notes/prayers into original text of Quran which seemed as they had different versions of Quran. I can show you examples if you want. --- So, I wanted to say we should be cautious for 2 reasons: 1. This might be a similar case where someone has his/her personal variations/notes etc. embedded into text. So it be possible, if the lower text was something that was not widely accepted in early Muslim community and hence not represent them accurately but was work of a minority/person in early Muslim community. But yes, the re-writing of Uthman's Quran upon it does raise questions. 2. Sana'a's Manuscript consists of about 15000 pieces, and not all of them have been studied/analysed. A lot of work is needed. It's only partially analysed. --- Furthermore according research, the comparison of upper text of Sana'a's manuscript and Birmingham Quran Manuscript shows "first results, based on character analysis and word analysis, have shown that the two old folios are very similar to their corresponding part contained in the present Quran (Uthmanic compilation). Furthermore, the comparison between Birmingham folios (corresponding to folios 3-4) and Sanaa folio (referenced by 029006B), which correspond to the end of chapter 19 and the beginning of chapter 20, shows that the two texts present a great similarity too." This means upper text of Sana'a's manuscript and Birmingham Quran Manuscript are similar as those of Uthman's standard Quran. This is the research paper if you wanna read: www.researchgate.net/publication/328215240_STATISTICAL_ANALYSIS_OF_THE_BIRMINGHAM_QURAN_FOLIOS_AND_COMPARISON_WITH_THE_SANAA_MANUSCRIPTS --- But yes, lower text does raise questions! But we can't be sure if it was widely accepted or just work of a group of people/person done to keep it for themselves. Also, Codex Parisino-petropolitanus' manuscript is dated almost to same period as that of Sana'a's manuscript but it's in alignment with Uthmanic Quran. I'm not trying to be Muslim apologetic here, but just saying we need to be cautious and do more research.
bro ur are right , i more thing i would like to add is that , its already mentioned in authentic hadiths that there used to some people at the time of prophet muhammad(PBUH) who wrote the quran in their own words to memorize it , so its nothing new it the just conformation of these hadiths . So, this particular script is just personal notes of someone and when someone found these notes (it may be same person whose personal notes they were) and realized there is some mistake i made he corrected this. But these ex- muslims knowledge of islam made me laugh, but what can we do , we can just pray for them. Peace
Quran is not preserved through written text but through the hearts of believers. "Rather, the Qur'an is distinct verses [preserved] within the breasts of those who have been given knowledge. And none reject Our verses except the wrongdoers." Quran 29: 49 is Sana manuscript any official copy or just writing of a scribe who made some mistakes while writing? While islam bashers try to find the differences it has and use this to show how Quran has changed, Muslims see how it is so similar to current Quran and see as proof of Quran preservation.
so you mean the quran is preserved in the hearts of the believers - no faulty memory anywhere - but it had variants - so Allah preserved many "true" versions - in the HEARTs of the believers.. HAHAHAHAHAHA
And Muhammad did not write it down. It was recalled from faulty memory long after his death, from various people. Apparently , some one else wrote a few parts down, and that was lost…. Because…..it was eaten by a goat. Th word of GOD was eaten by goats. You will never really know what Muhammad said. Or made up. Now tell me what difference it makes that many memorized it over centuries. Not a damn thing.
I always thought that the Koran is word for word dictation by Angle Gobriel to Mohamed. Why now the variance? A single variance between the current and past korans is enough to shatter the myth of dictation.
And this earth shattering finding is.....wait for it......drum roll please......a student's exercise book! Against it are scores of attested and identical manuscripts in varying degrees of completeness, many of which have been radiocarbon dated. I wonder which one I will believe......
Ibn shanabudh, a Qur'an scholar who recited variant readings(qira'at) of quran outside the 7 readings picked by ibn mujahid was tortured, forced to repent and jailed. Ibn mujahid used his political influence to canonize the 7readings he picked and legally prohibit the recitation of other readings. There are so many variant readings of Qur'an that Abul-al-qasim-al-hudhali collected "50 eponymous readings" in his qira'at compendium.
We don’t care what’s in the lower text. That was erased. If we are to judge the preservation of the Quran, we only use the upper text that was written for reference. Because the lower text must have been erased for a reason dummy…it wasn’t the accurate version. If anything, this shows that back then there must have been a rigorous checking system when writing a Quran to ensure that it is unchanged letter for letter. Probably there may have been a scribe and a memorizer, who kept correcting the scribe as he is writing down the Quran and that’s how they were written back then. Anyway I hope you find happiness and peace with your belief.
There were five stages of quran cononization : 1. By Uthman in 650. 2. Selection of 7 readings (qira'at) by ibn mujahid in the 10th century. 3. Selection of 2 transmitted variants (riwaaya) each for the 7 readings by Al-dani and Al-shatibi in the 11th century. 4. Addition of 3 more readings and their two transmitted versions each by al-jazari in the 15th century. Thus 10 qira'at and 20 riwaaya were canonized and "DECLARED DIVINE" . Thus "OFFICIALY" there are "20 QURAN VARIANTS". 5. Choosing of 'Hafs an asim' as the official quranic text by al-azhar in Cairo in 1923. Uthman burned the rest of the quranic materials during codification and al-azhar drowned the quranic variants other than 'Hafs an asim' in the river Nile. So it's basically ibn mujahid, al-jazari, al-dani and al-shatibi who chose all these 10 qiraat and their 2 transmitted versions (riwaaya) each according to their wish and canonized these Quran variants by declaring them "DIVINE". In addition to all these 20 canonized quran variants there are several shādhdha qurans. Shādhdha means anomalous, deviant, odd, isolated or irregular.
@@abdullahk9606 You obviously missed the point. It is not the finding but what was found about the find! 😂😂😂! They found that the quran had human help by way of writing, erasing and overwriting!
@@carolinebee7951 was this a recent discovery? Or are you broadcasting decades old news? If you think Sameer knows anything ask him to debate me. I bet he won't and if he does he wouldn't stand a chance!
@Satya Murthy Mk I still can't believe there are so many Muslims who are blindly following this religion and doing all those pagan rituals for nothing, they spend their whole life over this relgion just to end up in hell
BiG-C Official . lol, don't twist the facts.. be honest. The real fact is you christians doing pagan celebration every year. I can say more but it would be too harsh so i better just keep it.
A M . Muslims believe Jesus had a beautiful personality indeed.. We believe him as one of the mightiest Prophet. Regarding the rape, i don't believe that.
Omg, this Satya Murthy Mk is a Big Liar. His name sounds like an Indian name. Most of Indian population hate Dr.Zakir Naik, since they are Hindu believers.
We don’t care what’s in the lower text. That was erased. If we are to judge the preservation of the Quran, we only use the upper text that was written for reference. Because the lower text must have been erased for a reason dummy…it wasn’t the accurate version. If anything, this shows that back then there must have been a rigorous checking system when writing a Quran to ensure that it is unchanged letter for letter. Probably there may have been a scribe and a memorizer, who kept correcting the scribe as he is writing down the Quran and that’s how they were written back then. Anyway I hope you find happiness and peace with your belief.
The Sanaa Manuscript were most likely notes of a student who was taking dictation from his teacher, as there is the text “do not recite Bismillah here” in the undertext, showing the student wrote just as he heard from his teacher. It was most likely someone studying the Quran and putting notes. There are no core differences between Sanaa Manuscripts and Quran we read today, except for different prefixes and pronouns here and there, which is a result of different accents and methods used to recite the Quran. The meaning has not changed. It was somebody taking notes and learning.
I think you could have been clear that the dating is only for the parchment not the ink on that parchment. We don't know when the text was written. The whole Uthmanic narrative, and the claim the modern Quran comporting with this canonization is itself apologetics, the oldest extant complete Qurans date from at least two centuries after Mo and Uthman, there is no extant Uthnanic quran. Even those later extant versions have variations, even modern versions have variations . The Sana'a typical of text this old lacks diacritical markings, so even the apparent conformity with extant texts is reverse engineered . A word found today could have been intended to have been a very different word originally. The meaning given was an interpretative act , someone today presuming it is correct and then reversing this meaning back into the earlier text ( with no diacritical marks where the same text can have much more ambiguity in meaning ) is itself a confirmation bias.
We all know that the Qur'an is also preserved as an oral tradition, which is why we know how to read the consonantal text. People did not store parchment for decades. It was a scarce resource, and was used shortly after its creation. Even if the ink was dated, the next objection would be "Oh maybe the ink was stored for a hundred years before it was used". The hard facts as they are support the traditional narrative that the Qur'an was preserved in the form given to the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him).
@@paghal11 "which is why we know how to read the consonantal text." But you do not , there is a hadith where two sahabah from the same tribe, so same dialect end up practically in a fight over their recitation variations. Your own tradition talks of variations , so obviously even if memorised there would be variations in consonants. "People did not store parchment for decades. It was a scarce resource, and was used shortly after its creation. " That is a possible , but not certain. "Even if the ink was dated, the next objection would be "Oh maybe the ink was stored for a hundred years before it was used". The ink dating is irrelevant , ink does not come from a living thing, so Carbon dating cannot be used on it. That is why there is no dating for the ink, which means all you can date is the parchment not when the ink ended up on it. "The hard facts as they are support the traditional narrative that the Qur'an was preserved" Your tradition says there were variants in the texts and even the number of sura. It also says verses were lost . Your tradition contradicts what you say the tradition says. This "perfect" preservation narrative at this point is a joke.
he just told you with hard evidence that the whole book is a pure human fabrication edited a million times, and you say that you have now become a bigger believer, this is plain stupidity from your side.
@@mistmurth We don’t care what’s in the lower text. That was erased. If we are to judge the preservation of the Quran, we only use the upper text that was written for reference. Because the lower text must have been erased for a reason dummy…it wasn’t the accurate version. If anything, this shows that back then there must have been a rigorous checking system when writing a Quran to ensure that it is unchanged letter for letter. Probably there may have been a scribe and a memorizer, who kept correcting the scribe as he is writing down the Quran and that’s how they were written back then. Anyway I hope you find happiness and peace with your belief.
@@omarmansour6766 1 your reply is proof that you admit that your quran is corrupted, there is a lower text and an upper text, who decided that one text is better than the other assuming that allah has revealed only one version of the text. 2 did you read the story of abdullah bin saad bin abi sarah, he was a scriber to mohamed, he left islam (one of the first ones to leave it) do you know why, well as he was scribing the quran, he altered some surats, when he told mohamed that this alteration is from me, mohamed never objected, he actually liked it, so abdullah bin saad bin abi sarah was surprised how come mohamed never objected the alteration of the words of allah, so he decided to leave islam and fled. read Sirat Ibnu Hisham 3 the quran is written 100% based on the memorization of the old scribers 60 years after the death of mohamed, how can some one declare that it is exactly how it was reavealed 4 the only reason any text was erased or altered as you are suggesting, it is pure proof that your quran is a pure fabrication of men for men you should read more than one book in order for you to understand that islam is a fake religion that was fabricated by mohamed in order for him to fulfill his sexual perversions, his thirst power, his slave trade, his war mongering, his love for money and wealth
Any religion (Islam) that promotes polygamy and marriage to your first cousin is not from God. I find it hard to believe God would sanction behavior that is absolutely destructive to his creation.
Sadeghi then pointed out, “For historical reasons, however, what is of greater interest is the probability that the parchment is older than a certain date. … The probability that the parchment is older than AD 646 is 75.1 %, or a three-to-one likelihood. It is highly probable therefore, that the Ṣanʿāʾ I manuscript was produced no more than 15 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad.”[43] He concluded that the scriptio inferior text belonged to the period of the companions of Prophet Muhammad, whilst the scriptio superior text belonged to the ʿUthmānic tradition, and using stemmatics, the ʿUthmānic tradition was shown to give the most accurate reproduction of the Prophetic prototype.
Even if a text/book is perfectly preserved this doesn't automatically make the contents in it true -"Mein Kampf" by Hitler and "Das Kapital" by Karl Marx are probably perfectly preserved from their originals but is the content in each necessarily true?
We love the tittle in Indonesia language thanks sameer, Indonesia the biggest abdools in the world & get lost by islam, you can see it right? Keep it on Indonesia language to atractive many abdools, God will bless your job brother.
@@royssche The 7 ahruf was a ridiculous idea Muhammad came up with especially when he gave synonyms! What for? If a language is foreign to someone, how can giving synonyms make it easier? This daft idea of the 7 ahruf eventually became banned by Uthman by his standardisation. All other variants to be destroyed which is why Ibn Masud was upset and told his followers to hide his mushaf. The 7 ahruf idea just shows that Muhammad doesn't know what he is doing. Even a primary school child can see that this will end up in arguments.
Excellent! Thanks for proving that it is simply a late bad copy, and the earlier good copies (without vowel marks) and which all agree with each other, are the ones we should concentrate on.
@@paghal11 But there AREN'T ANY early copies of Qur'an! If there were, you would ALREADY HAVE IT! Goofball! And if there were a copy, like say, the Sa'ana from Yemeni, WHY isn't that manuscript in distribution NOW? Because it doesn't come NEAR to the present day Qur'an. Ask yourself why that Sa'ana manuscript hasn't been published? Your whole religion is based on erroneous texts. Read the Gospel and find who God truly is.
It is sad, when people believe lies. But also it says a lot about the people who are willing to look deeper and realize. Thanks Abdullah, love the t-shirt by the way.
the quote you took from wikipedia is followed by this: "However with the radiocarbon-dating of the Birmingham Quran manuscript to before the year 645 with a 95.4% accuracy, the latter is believed to be older then the Sana'a manuscript, and is seen as the oldest Quran manuscript."
Every oppressive theocratic government in the Muslim world, and every Jihad group bases their authority on the premise that the Qur'an is the unchanged word of God... If that premise is proven false... then everything crumbles, and even Muhammad's claim to be the ultimate prophet of God, is in doubt. This is wonderful news for all humanity! :)
I heard that the Quran used mostly today is a version....of the Hafs text that was edited and compiled by the Egyptian School Board in the 1920's and adopted as a standardised text in 1924 in Cairo. In 1984 The King of Saudi Arabia also authorised this text. Yet it is now known that over 30 different, and I mean with serious differences, versions of the Quran are printed and available today. The claim of supernatural unchanged Quranic text cannot be maintained in light of this information we have today. If Uthman did indeed destroy many of the verses recited to him / scholars of that day by the 'faithful reciters', then we cannot rely on texts that followed that event including the Hafs. The Sana'a text seems to confirm that case and does cast some doubt on the veracity of what is published today as being an 'unchanged Quran'. Maybe more serious research is needed and a good long introspection into the motives of Uthman and those who followed him with commentaries that shaped Islam into what it is today? What will they find?
@@ottopotatum5775 The Sana'a lower text is a bad copy, which was not propagated to other manuscripts, nor does it have an "isnaad" (chain of transmission). It has been dismissed by all serious scholars as a "personal study Qur'an", not meant for distribution as the final product. Full of spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, omissions etc. Maybe it was written by a scholar of the New Testament, hahaha!!
The Sanaa text, among other things, demonstrates the evolution of the Quran as a human creation. Just as the canonical books of the New Testament were ultimately decided by church patriarchs, Uthman and subsequent Islamic clergy decided what "God said." It was clearly not the word of a perfect God to "his messenger," unless God changed his mind between the pre-Uthmanic recitations to the post-Uthmanic ones.
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn. And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
@@theguyver4934 it is the truth the Qur’an is the only book in the history of humanity that still almost the same since written 1400 years ago what evere you believe that it is a revelation of God or not, good book or bad book, it is still the same book
@Zack Smith No the point is not invalid. I am saying that there is no Qur'an in existence from the time of Uthman. This is what the leading Qur'anic scholars in Turkey have said. As far as meaning goes, you have to look at each verse in order to come to that conclusion.
Absolutely correct, Prabhu. Western scholars have ascertained as much. Modern people generally don't realise what a monumental undertaking the assemblage of these kind of books was back then, or how time-consuming that activity was. Writing and compiling something like this would always have been a state-sponsored exercise, and in the time of Uthman there was simply no state to speak of. Not until the time of Muawiya was there any stability, and not until the time of Abd el Malik was there any recognisable Islamic state (i.e. with centralised institutions and strong coercive powers). All the available evidence points to the collection of this as occurring during Abd el Malik's reign. This began decades after the death of Uthman.
@@davidmontoute2074 Very good points. The end of the 7th century is where the story begins, a story about Arab rulers appropriating for themselves an obscure "Arab" religious movement. And this religion takes a couple of centuries to develop fully.
Definitely. I think the doctrine fully crystalises when the Ulemaa rise to power in the mid 9th century. Unfortunately, they designed their legal system in such a way that it would resist all fundamental change. And today modern Muslims drag this thing around like a rotten corpse.
623-669 CE? The carbon dating is pretty much irrelevant, because people can simply store the papers and use it 100 years later. François Déroche puts the lower text to the second half of the 7th century, due to the writing style..
I thoroughly enjoy this channel you've got some great content! I am curious as to why this claim is still made that the Quran is unchanged. It is very possible! Was the original written in Arabic or Aramaic? And what about all the different versions of the Quran - 31 that I know of?! Also, didn't the followers of Mohammad all live at different times?
Othman RA himself was a companion or disciple of the prophet ﷺ who memorised the Quran. If anybody is an expert on the Quran it’s Othman and the rest of the companions, no one else. The Quran was standardised very early on and for that reason alone, it’s still remains preserved to this day. You can make all the videos you want attacking the Quran but at the end of the day it’s Allah ﷻ who will protect His Book.
Mr Sameer Uthman destroyed copies of their personal Quran that were written down from their own memory. Some copies weren't verified as accurate. The Quran we have today is a collection of chapters that are identical in memorization, so they were labeled as accurate and made into a book. That Quran you have is an inaccurate personal Quran that wasn't included because it was different than what the majority had memorized. That Quran could be a paraphrased one, it could be one that the writer had made mistakes when copying it down, or maybe the writer had forgotten some bits and replaced them. That Quran is sort of like the Bible today, it has been altered. Please read your history properly.
throughout the video the differences have been called "significant". This is an opinion and I respect it. However, to me the differences are minor, but that said, there are some interesting theories put forward by Muslim and non-Muslim scholars alike, in academic literature regarding the Sanaa manuscript. This is not the place for a true academic discussion and I recommend people with genuine interest in the subject to take a look in the academic literature regarding the subject. I also refer serious investigators to look up the "Birmingham manuscript" which is probably the earliest Quran manuscript we have today. I do not engage in conversations in non-academic environment so I will leave it there. Best wishes. edit: Just wanted to add one point that I see often goes unmentioned when discussing these early manuscripts of the Quran: while a gazillion of things can happen to written texts and that is something that can be preserved for us to see a thousand or so years later, we can never know the degree to which the genuine and the far far more widespread method of promulgation of Quran - oral transmission via memorization - has been preserved over the same timeframe. This is a highly crucial point, which sadly too often goes undiscussed even in critical discussions. This is highly crucial point for a number of reasons, one of which is that the oral (memorized) tradition actually allows for one more way, besides the writing form, to preserve the Quran as is and actually allows for double-checking the integrity of the written form. One question then could be, well, how can we then ever know whether the memorized version itself has been preserved? The answer is, it is impossible to know. For me personally, I think that if there is AT LEAST one early manuscript where the ENTIRETY of whatever is still legible does not conform to the standard version, then I would believe that the integrity of the original Quran had not been preserved at least in one instance, and so the Muslim belief, that Quran's text will never change, is wrong. So far, we have the Sanaa and the Birmingham manuscripts as two earliest texts available to us. In one of these (Sanaa), the text highly similar to the standard version CAN be found in it, and in the other (Birmingham), the entire text conforms almost completely to the standard version. Quite frankly, it is up to the individual how they approach these evidences and then interpret them and then decide on their faith. All of what I have said is known to non-Muslims, ex-Muslims, a secular Muslim and a practising Muslim and yet everyone seems to have gone after the persuasions of their heart, as the great psychologist, the Quran mentions, for good or for worse, but in any case, all views must be respected. Time will certainly tell the outcome of each these positions. As an academic, I reserve my judgment until more studies are done on this and hopefully more manuscripts are uncovered. Let's see.
The preservation of Quran mainly depend on the memorization not writing ,and the writing just add more confirmation but it is not the main source.Quran is a different book which easy to memorized in arabic and there are touthands of memorizers in each generation of Muslims since the time of prophet. it means if there is any copy of the Qur’an today any one of the good memorizers can write the whole Quran from his mind and other memorizers can check this Quran specially if we got touthands of them,so there is no way that all of them are wrong.until today the main method to learn Quran is to read it in front of A proficient reader and memorizer of the Qur’an , while it is not enough to depend on the written text of Quran without taking it from a proficient memorizer, who must have testimony that he learned the Qur’an from his master who should be a proficient memorizer as well, and thus the chain must extend to reach the Companions and then the Prophet. Therefore, manuscripts do not prove anything because they are not the original means of transmitting the Qur’an, in the most correct sense, Manuscripts are presented to the reading of thousands of master memorizers of the Qur’an and corrected on their foundations, not the other way around, because the main way of preserving the Qur’an is by thousands of proficient memorizer in each generation, not the manuscripts.
Yes it does but it also highlights that if the Quran we have today is the perfect unerring word of god then why is this different? Why did it have to be corrected? Why is it so much younger than the story of the making of the physical Quran would imply?
So that would mean that the quran we know today is the version that Uthman composed of existing verses. He was basically the final editor and might have left certain verses out. This wouldn’t have been such an issue if the muslims didn’t insist that the quran had been perfectly conserved. Clearly this isn’t the case.
You should of discussed this with an Islamic historian, but you won't. What's fascinating about History is that, the Quran will continue to be loved and memorised long after you die...you will be just a rearrangement of carbon forgotten
Bro,let the dogs keep on barking. Meanwhile just witnessed so many revert to Islam in my home town since Ramadan :) May God guide everybody back to the straight path. Salaam!
There is no impartial Muslim academic because of the intolerance of Islam. Recently in Pakistan a biology professor was forced to recant under duress his views on evolution. So consulting a muslim historian will not help.
After having said all these comments,if we remember the Surah Hakka the Ayats between 38 and 47 what we should think about them? Wasn’t it better to have a Kuran written and assisted by Muhammad (SAV) while he was living? Why he did not wright down himself the original one as revealed to him by Gabriel? Who can say that Kuran in total is authentic? Do we have the original copy of Uthmanic Kuran?Where is it?
It is a blessing from God who is All-compassionate and All-Merciful that we are given this gift. As we Americans say, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth". Let this blessing be a joy that teaches us rather than one more intellectual game to dissuade us. For myself I get so very tired of self-identified scholars cajoling me on how to practice my Faith. God knows what I do and what I have to work on. If this gift is meant to find me, it will (Inshallah). Thanks for your video, but perhaps God will help you to employ more faith and less intellect. For myself the Quran could be written in ballpoint on paper towel and I would still be using it to seek the Straight Path.
@@bharath952 No, I and my brain are in the 21st Century and I truly appreciate the hard work of modern scholars. I am also one who accepts that nothing is revealed of God save what He Wills. The Intuition that leads my Spirituality and the thinking that leads my Intellect are related, though one does not govern the other. As a result, I am grateful for academia but pray always for guidance. Further, in this way I can accept this newly discovered text for the blessing that it is; an effort by Man to preserve his best understanding of a Divine revelation. Alhamduillah FWIW.
@@bharath952 Don't you guys burn widows alive, lynch people for eating beef and can't share a meal with a "low caste" person? Who is in the 7th century?
"can we be sure that the quran we have today is the one Muhammad came up with"
Can we even be sure Muhammad would recognise islam today?
Adam Adam if he saw isis dominanting the world yes
@Jean Belmondo
Like JC, Mo's existence really is not historically supported. Mecca historically did not exist in the geographical location it does today or perhaps at all.
So ....
"Can we even be sure Muhammad would recognise islam today?"
you might be asking something like if fictional Harry Potter would recognize the narrative of the fictional Goblet of Fire.
Can we be sure that "muhammad" even existed?
@David Ward Are we still talking about mythologies like prophets and "all knowing god" in 2019?!! Surprising. I'm not at all interested in the theological (ie., mythological) part of the discussion. That's for brainwashed religious people.
I'm only interested in the historicity. That said, I'm almost certain that muhammad never existed.
@David Ward Have you come across the anthologies edited by Karl Heinz Ohlig and Gerd Puin?
fascinating video, this is such an interesting area of development, can't wait to see more on this!
I love Gabriel Said Reynolds, but the notion of an Uthmanic recension seems to be a mythic thing, really. At the time of Uthman there was no Islamic state, and no Islam as such. The "Umma" was a loose collection of believers, a group which included Jews and Christians. And this fact is backed up by the Constitution of Medina - the only 7th century Islamic document (other than the Qur'an) to have survived till today. It is more likely that the early 20th century scholar Paul Casanova had it right when he dated the collection of the Qur'an to Abd el Malik's reign (685 - 705 CE). Abd el Malik - the first ruler to actually call himself "Caliph" - was also credited with the Qur'an's standardisation, sending his governor Al Hajjaj Ibn Yusuf to burn "errant" copies of it. Why would he have needed to do this if Uthman had supposedly already done it 40 years earlier?
A great video from Abdullah S. anyway. And it is also great to see Abdullah Gondal break down the individual variants for Arabic speakers. How the "never-been-changed" mantra has survived for so long is mind-boggling to me.
this is not an interesting area of development this is an area known by muslim scholarship for more than a 1,400 years prompted by Muhammad sanctioning of the 7 different modes of transmission based on the 7 major dialects spoken by the arabs ………………...nothing changes if I say.....………...it was late AND DARK OUTSIDE...………..or...………………..it was night and dark outside...……………...as opposed to jesus being taken by the devil to the temple first then to the mountain ……….or ........to the mountain first then the temple clear difference that changes the dynamic........................let me know when skakespeare should be dug up and burned at the stake ..........lol
how lay people become internet scholars on all subjects is one of the DRAW backs of this information age INFORMATION GIVEN LEGITIMACY BASED ON PRECONCIEVED NOTIONS BEING JUSTIFIED is in and of itself contrary to the definition of knowledge and well founded understanding and solid conclusion . the sciences of the ulam of quran its COMPILATION ITS ORTHOGRAPHY and the science of contributors of its development is a detailed data base greater than that of the...….mosad…..cia.………...and f.b.i combined minus computers do u understand the significance of this we know the difference between 2 different contributors of quran who might have lived at the same time and who had the exact same first and last names WHERE ALL AS IT RELATES TO THEM PERSONALLY AS INDIVIDUALS IS KNOWN this by itself is a separate science in the scholarship of quran and HADITH a science independent and unto itself again without the benefit of computers all on dedication commitment supported by other men providing a system on internal checks and preservation of authenticity innate in there field …….SOME OF THE COMMENTS U READ BY ASSHOLES WHO THINK THEMSELVES 99 CENT SCHOLARS with a prejudice degree from the internet amaze me they have only a committed SCHOLARSHIP TO DELUSION justified in prejudice and the ignorance that feeds it , these so called lovers of so called freedom personally encarserating themselves away from the knowledge that defines the freedom they say they cherish . …….read some of the shit here its people confident in the benefit of ignorance
some of these cognitive deficient individuals might be former muslims who partake in the kind of anti-Islamic propaganda that feeds HATRED and to some degree policy THAT MAY BE DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE 4 ECONOMIC policy AND DIRECT PHYSICAL HARM BEING DONE TO ONE OR MORE OF THERE OWN STILL MUSLIM FAMILY MEMBERS still living in there countries of there own ethnic origin AND THE POSSIBLE PHYSICAL HARM DONE TO THOSE WHO HAVE MIGRATED TO THE WEST there culpability is direct because they are used as proof pawns to justify the prejudice of non muslim antagonist giving them the ultimate stamp of legitimacy TO DO AS THEY WILL ……………………..is it any wonder why in the Abrahamic traditions death 4 apostacy is law as is a traitor in secular society ………………….the bible in duet.13 calls not only for death 4 the apostate but the mass MURDER OF ALL WHO LIVE WHERE HE CAME FROM...……………….contemplate that...………….for me fuck um leave alone u can not kill WHAT is not living
@@TheFateofFaith You are right Malik. Islam is a form of christianity, that's why death for apostasy is still in islam. BTW, islam is non trinitarian christianity and muhammad most probably never existed.
These are not the first texts to have their wrings revealed by u.v. light. Ground penetrating radar has also revealed many ancient towns and cities. Ancient texts are also being rapidly put online and available to all.
We are very lucky to be living in an age where history isn't as good at keeping secrets.
I do wonder though, would things like this get revealed sooner if Gulf State royalty was not donating so many millions to western universities, particularly with regard to Middle East Studies and Islamic Studies.
It is Islamic to bribe people to get their support.
Only fiction demands "belief."
Reading widely, one comes to know it's ALL fiction.
+Muhammed Asghar Dharani LOL! Everything with Muslims ends up becoming an insulting sexual comment! You have been lied to by your Imams, Clerics and Scholars. They all know that Islam is fake. Only a complete idiot would not realize this after spending an hour or two studying Islam. Time for all Muslims to leave Islam. Just leave it. It's fake. If you believe that there is a God then you really need to leave it because the real God is going to burn you in hell for all eternity for following the commands in the Quran.
You don't require belief in science. Everything has been proven to be true.
+Muhammed Asghar Dharani If it's so real then I'm sure you will be able to give me the GPS coordinates for the location of the muddy spring that the sun sets into? If you can't then you have to leave Islam because it is fake. The Quran has Allah saying that Dhul Quarnayn went so far west that he found the place where the sun sets. The Quran also says that the sun runs on to its resting place. The Hadith says that this resting place is under Allah's throne where it prostrates until given permission to rise again. The Hadith also has Mohammed telling a Muslim that the sun sets in a muddy spring. So I'm sure that you've got the coordinates because if you don't then both the Quran and Hadith was written by idiots.
+Muhammed Asghar Dharani History of al-Tabari, Vol 1- General Introduction and from the Creation to the Flood (trans. Franz Rosenthal, State University of New York Press, Albany 1989), pp. 231-237:
this is (meant by) God's word: "He found it setting in a muddy spring," meaning by "muddy (hami'ah)" black clay - and 180 springs in the east likewise of black clay, bubbling and boiling like a pot when it boiled furiously. He continued. Every day and night, the sun has a new place where it rises and a new place where it sets
It would be great if they let scientists compare the Sanaa quran with the manuscript they found in Birmingham a few years ago... but I read they won’t do that
Why?
Tanja Van Kessel They have carbon dated it and run it under ultra-violet light. They haven’t found any under-writing. I’m confident that whatever options they have to study it they will use.
JE Hoyes As I understand it, they can only carbondate the skin or parchment or whatever it’s written on, not the ink. So it will always be hard to come to clear conclusions.
@Zack Smith No issue arose because it was just 2 pages of "a" Qur'an.
@Zack Smith And many other things prove that the Qur'an existed before 600.
This only made my iman stronger.
U just have no idea so thts just obvious u dont have to question ur self ur god is bkack stone the one u pray in 5times aday the one u bleave it can clear ur danbi or dirtiness islam is just arab paganism before islam so mohamed make them abook thts all
How so?
Easier to fool someone than to show them they have been fooled.
The clear example of,"you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink"
Then show it to your friend to make their iman stronger as well 😊
Allahuakbar. Allah is the only God and Muhammad is the Messenger. Quran is the word of Allah.
I lost trust in the existing Quran, and I'm going to stop reading it.
Then you should study the numerical and mathematical structure of the Quran.
@@9isy7y you remember the convert that tried to fix the number 19 miracle that did not work by excluding some verses from the quran?
He got a fatwa to his name for modifying the quran and was shot dead within a week.
Google and read the news story if you haven't heard about it.
I think that's a good hint to skip any numerological properties of the quran as they aren't there when you look for them, and the search for them can get you killed.
@@NomenNescio99 I remember him. His name was Rashad Khalifa and he wasn't a convert. Anyway, I studied this whole 19 thing as well as other numerical properties of the Quran and it's real. No human can produce such a phenomenon. It's a great sign from God for our generation.
@@9isy7y allah=satan= mohammad= Prophet=cult
@@scepticeye3186 How do you know Allah is Satan? Are you a Christian?
Wow. Thank you brother. Please keep educating people
What you have shown to us is not diferent version.
And
It do not change what is mean.
Because they still speak on same issues with same senses.
Perhaps they where some forgetfulness but not contradiction.
That why they decide to rewrite it again
@Yousef Ghaneemah
What you have shown to us is not diferent version.
And
It do not change what is mean.
Because they still speak on same issues with same senses.
Perhaps they where some forgetfulness but not contradiction.
That why they decide to rewrite it again
Yousef Ghaneemah Birmingham manuscript is much later.
Yousef Ghaneemah I as a Hindu can understand where you are coming from. I agree with you that Quran was written by humans. I also agree some Muslims follow Islam without any logic. What’s the point in hiding hairs with hijaab when the Muslim girls wear skinny jeans?
@@Noone-cn6ow
Do you mean perfectly preserved?I don't think so.
Very perfect simplicity in the presentation. You will find the same things in my son’s note book for learning Quran. If he was using a old animal skin they will consider this as the early version of the Quran. So simple.
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn.
And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them
Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
The Sanaa Manuscript were most likely notes, as there is the text “do not recite Bismillah here” in the undertext. It was most likely someone studying the Quran and putting notes. There are no core differences between Sanaa Manuscripts and Quran we read today, except for different prefixes and pronouns here and there, which is a result of different accents and methods used to recite the Quran. The meaning has not changed. It was somebody taking notes and learning.
I tend to disagree with what you are saying. We can generally agree that the Ahadeeth was written by men who were born in East Iran, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan and most likely never went to Mecca. These canonised folk worked out of Baghdad and wrote the Ahadeeth 200 to 300 years after the event. In other words, they wrote them in the 8th, 9th, and 10th Centuries. If as the Ahadeeth appears to simply be a creation of man why cannot the Quran have simply been a work in progress by man? I think the argument that it was simply note taking is a real stretch but I can understand why you would say that.
Yes, try very, very hard to convince yourself that there is no difference.
Sir, you clearly took a step in the direction of learning about the compilers of ahadeeth, but I believe in your research you missed out on a key component on the system of verification of ahadeeth (plural for hadith). All ahadeeth that are labeled as authentic must go through a rigouris and strict process of authentificatiom word for word from many sources, in which the exact account of all of those who were there matches up, any slight difference and the narration is perceived as inauthentic. These man compiled and studied ahadeeth not only in Baghdad but traveled the Muslim world collecting ahadeeth from only reliable sources. You may disagree with me, but it is jsut as or even more reliable than any modern form of university level research that we read from our text books. I don't want to play the role of a scholar, as I am not, but that is my limited information on this subject and I cannot recall details that I am not 100% sure fo on the subject.
Asma Hilali has argued that the lower text of the palimpsest might have actually been a student exercise book, in an attempt to explain the many differences to the standard Uthmanic text. However, leading Quranic manuscript expert Hythem Sidky refers to a paper by Nicolai Sinai for "criticism of her reading of the lower text and overall thesis" and to a paper by another Quranic manuscript expert, Éléonore Cellard, "for a codicological reconstruction of portions of the undertext demonstrating the document’s status as a codex and the product of professional scribes". For these reasons Hilali's thesis is now widely considered to be completely untenable.
@@rashidsabri7319 So everything is man made. thank you for clearing that.
During the time of Uthman, arabs controlled at least 9 provinces. And the hadiths say one uthmanic quran was sent to each province. Today there is no original uthmanic quran, not even a copy of it or even a copy of a copy of a copy.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
And the earliest fragment of the New Testament is a credit card sized piece of the Gospel of "John", likely more than 175 years after the events it described, written anonymously. The Birmingham Manuscript coincides with the lifetime of the Prophet, and was likely produced shortly after the Uthmanic standardization. Probably around 650 CE, or around 30 years max after the death of the Prophet. I can read it in the original Arabic, even without vowel marks and it is identical to the Qur'an in its current form.
The fastest growing group of people is the ex-muslims, good job.
Don't delude yourself . And don't get scammed by these idiots.
Any statistics for that ? Lol.
Source?
he has been refuted ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
keeping in mind the majority doesn't go public about it.
the type of variations strongly suggests that the lower text was some kind of a school practice of memorization. Substituting a word with a synonym, spelling mistakes, clause order, different grammatic structure that produces the same meaning...etc. Those are signs of false recollection of memory. When I heard about the variation of Sana'a Manuscript I was very excited I thought the variations will be of a legal or political kind that the political power added or omitted to serve their current agenda. But all the variations that I have read (around 30 ) have "false memory collection" written on them. Plus the handwriting is that of an amateur. Having said that, I could be wrong but I genuinely believe that this is the most likely theory.
@Last Shadow, the chapter 9 of the Quran doesn’t start with name of Allah as all the rest of the chapters. In the lower text there was note written at the top that said do not recite Bidmillahi . That alone indicated that it was a student’s notes as you opined
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn.
And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them
Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
@@alhassangangu4357 Which means the Koran didn't exist as a book in the 7th Century. This itself shows that there are multiple versions of the Koran.
@@keyurpatel1982 Qur'an chapter 2 verse 2 answers your argument
@@alhassangangu4357 Quran Chapter 2:2 That the book no doubt in it, a guidance for the God -Conscious. ////// Now please explain where is the answer here. Chapter 2:2 does not state which book the the author is talking about. The author of the Koran is so useless that he doesn't mention which book he is talking about. Criminal translators translate it to mean "We have sent it" whereas the line mentions neither Allah nor the Koran. Translators have fooled you as well.
This seems to be a very significant find! I appreciate your work, and this channel, Abdullah. Thank you.
I would love to see you debate these dawah guys from speakers corner because this would open up the eyes of many Muslims who still believes in the lies that the Quran has never been changed.
You don't debate them. You show them. There is nothing to debate. Every time someone tries to educate them though, they just shout them down.
Straw man argument.
he wouldn't debate because he doesn't have the proper understanding, for further clarification plz watch this
ruclips.net/video/K6fAZ7xW53Y/видео.html
Truth about Sanna manuscripts
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
1 hour refuting this claims.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
it would be interesting to see what changes have been made and how much the meaning of verses have been altered
Truth about Sanna manuscripts
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
1 hour refuting this claims.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
you are a very intelligent person I am happy to see from the comments below others are also waking up. Keep up the spirit and never give up
is he though?
ruclips.net/video/K6fAZ7xW53Y/видео.html
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn.
And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them
Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
Dr. Jay Smith and Hatun Tash have done hundreds of hours of research on the DIFFERENT consonental differences of these old Islamic (?) Texts.
@Zack Smith Zack, you NEED him to be a liar because what he is saying absolutely DESTROYS your religion! I am sorry it is so hard to come out of Islam and find the REAL God, YHWH. Jesus is the human manefestation of God's Words. Jesus is the PHYSICAL presence of God who is not DEAD. Even your Qur'an says Jesus didn't die!! Why IS THAT? Because it is TRUE! Jesus, the body God dwelt in is still ALIVE. Worship a living God Zack!
@Zack Smith
What is the lie, o liar?
@Zack Smith , not an argument
@Zack Smith So far he's presenting evidence and you are making unsubstantiated accusations.
You don't come out as the trustworthy one in that comparison.
Kafir Linda Clark ! Those hate preachers
One of the best videos I watched. Love you brother.... Keep doing your job. We are always with you.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn.
And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them
Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
@@inquisitivemind007 Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn.
And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them
Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
The Truth will set you free
i have same feelings i feel angry that i was believing in a lie
haha he got refuted brother ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
WELCOME TO THE CLUB.....
IT'S A BIG BIG BIG CLUB....
IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF SOCIETY......
Abdullah Sameer ( may peace be upon you 💞); 💕 from Australia
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
"O, believers! Whoever among you abandons their faith, Allah will replace them with others who love Him and are loved by Him. They will be humble with the believers but firm towards the disbelievers ..." 5:54
-God
Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.
Corinthians 6:9-11
You shall not make idols for yourselves or erect an image or pillar, and you shall not set up a figured stone in your land to bow down to it, for I am the Lord your God.”
Leviticus 26:1
You must not worship your black stone or your cube pagan. You must worship your Lord JWHW stop worshipping the many gods and the idols of islam and worship the god who spoke to Moses and save your mortal soul. Black stones will not save you.
@@rickrozen2341 It's a case of swapping the threats of one religion for those of another. People would just be jumping from the frying pan into the fire.
@@rickrozen2341 You know full well that you worship a man, and Muslims worship He who created Jesus, and his mother Mary, and the rest of the Universe. No Muslim has ever worshipped a cube or a stone, just as Jews do not worship a wall or a temple.
My conclusion after years of listening and researching is that mo copied Gnosticism
Bahira Sethianism.
Ignorance
Tend to think so too
To some extent. He probably thought they were (orthodox) christian texts.
Nestorian Christianity was prevalent in the Middle East before Islam. Arabia, Syria, Mesopotamia and Persia had many Nestorian Christians. Nestorianism differs from other Christian groups, but Islam share some ideas with it. It is telling that the version of Christianity that share most with Islam is the one that was already common in the Middle East before Muhammed.
Abdullah asks: "Is this just a bad copy?" Well, if you spent a few minutes to actually go the notes provided by those that conducted the study you would realize that it is a terrible copy.
Refer to page 61 of the study that quotes verses from Surat Al-Tawba. On this page alone, we can find three catastrophic mistakes.
1- Verse 81 says: Al-Naru Jahannam النار جهنم (instead of Naru Jahannam). This is grammatically incorrect.
2- Verse 85 is completely missing.
3- Verse 88 says: Wa 'ula'ika huwa al-muflihoon وأولئك هو المفلحون (instead of وأولئك هم المفلحون). Again, a major grammatical mistake.
Furthermore, variants in the works that existed pre-Uthman are preserved in works of Tafseer and other Qur'anic studies works. So, no, there is not shady conspiracy theory here that scholars have been hiding.
Now, how could the variant of a burnt work be preserved after they were burnt?
Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people (Muslims) of Syria and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia and Azarbaijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their (the Muslims of Syria and Iraq) differences in the recitation of the Qur'an, so he said to 'Uthman, "O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and the Christians did before." So 'Uthman sent a message to Hafsa saying, "Send us the manuscripts of the Qur'an so that we may compile the Qur'anic materials in perfect copies and return the manuscripts to you." Hafsa sent it to 'Uthman. 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Said bin Al-As and 'AbdurRahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies. 'Uthman said to the three Quraishi men, "In case you disagree with Zaid bin Thabit on any point in the Qur'an, then write it in the dialect of Quraish, the Qur'an was revealed in their tongue." They did so, and when they had written many copies, 'Uthman returned the original manuscripts to Hafsa. 'Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they had copied, and ordered that all the other Qur'anic materials, whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt. ... (Sahih al-Bukhari: vol. 6, bk. 61, no. 510)
Dude sat with his own name on his T-shirt lol
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
I always knew that this book of nonsense was made by men and by a mad man who created this sect just to satisfy his own desires.
hajra Ahmed Its not islam growing but arab population. (Birth rate)
Elizabeth Taylor . did you study it from anti-Islamic sources ?
Pls don't tell lies about Quran.
@@djaelanid1923 My partner's parents were born in the Yemen and my koran is the M. A. S. Abdel Haleem Parallel Arabic Text
Elizabeth Taylor . I recommend you to consult the scholars for better understanding.
@@djaelanid1923 I am capable of understanding the written word and I am horrified with what I have found, can you tell me are you someone who would murder your mother, father, brother or sister if they were to reject the teachings of islam?.
I tell you again sir. To hear the truth being spoken..... It just sounds so good.
really?
ruclips.net/video/K6fAZ7xW53Y/видео.html
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Good analysis , Abdullah, great job .
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn.
And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them
Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
Subhan Allah. If anything, the Sanaa Manuscripts has increased my belief in this true religion. I havent yet read what authentic scholars has said about these minor differences that you referred to which do not change the meaning whatsoever but I would imagine that part of the reason why Othman has ordered the destruction of all other manuscripts is to make sure that all muslims have the only authentic version of the Quran after he has done a significant effort in checking all the available written or memorised scripts.
Some people would try their best to try to poke holes in the religion of God but Allah is preserving his Deen till the day of judgement. Allah says "translated to english" (Their intention is to extinguish Allah's Light (by blowing) with their mouths: But Allah will complete (the revelation of) His Light, even though the Unbelievers may detest (it).)
@@bourbon4707 what is your proof to that?
What about the claim that Koran is preserved letter for letter word for word
🤣
If someone farts 💨, your belief in the Koran will increase. Just saying so does not prove it is so!
Nobody cares lol
By God, This Increased my faith, every person is not qualified for perfect memorization so like the above the writer he/she Misses some words. And
THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT USMAN (r.a) observed and took an action.
When Uthman ask to write the Qur'an in Quraish dialect, He form the Council which lead by Zaid and all the hufaz were called to confirm the right wahyu . The hufaz had recite in front of Prophet Muhammad saw. No doubt and history has shown it. Only the blind cannot see and the deaf cannot hear.
Finding ancient manuscripts is very interesting, particularly for those with an interest in history. But as to whether the Koran is the word of a god, surely anyone who believes must ask, is this the best a GOD can do? And, what level of maturity was responsible for the weird, wacky and downright nasty bits? If you are brought up in a religion I can understand the difficulty in being objective, rather than always simply defending your beliefs and culture. But away from other believers, in those quiet times when alone, a mind that is not afraid must ask some very serious questions, including about the nature of belief itself.
Yes, imagine a university receiving millions from arab countries, would they publish and be damned, or keep anything their donors would not like under wraps.
That's why they need to spread fear to everyone. You question it (their book content), honor killer or dead sentence fatwa will come to you. This cult is too dangerous...
@@dharmayoddha4507 unfortunately that is too often the case.
Answer to your fake allegations in detail ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
Answer to your fake allegations in detail ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
some people outwardly looks like Muslims,but ALLAH left them long time ago,and they dont realize it,and even dont see that they became enemies of ALLAH and His Prophet (saw).these people are examples of a living body and a dead heart.May ALLAH protect us from HIS enemies. AAMIN
2:106
We do not abrogate a verse or cause it to be forgotten except that We bring forth [one] better than it or similar to it. Do you not know that Allah is over all things competent?
We call it naskh al-tilawa .
Then the Prophet memorizes the Quran. Jibril re-memorizes the Qur'an every year. And the companions memorize the Koran . It is impossible to lose a verse unless allah is the cause
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Just add to this discussion, first I really appreciate this video since things like these aren't in consciousness of public usually.
But I think we should be careful/cautious to reach conclusions.
Birmingham Quran Manuscript is currently believed to be the oldest Quran in the world (Sana's Manuscript used to considered the oldest Quran until 2015). Though Birmingham Quran Manuscript only consists of two leaves of parchment that are a fragment of an early Quranic manuscript dated between 568 AD - 645 AD.
Researchers at the University of Birmingham in England dated the parchment to within a 95.4% accuracy. Just to mention it has the same text as standard Uthman''s Quran. Plus it doesn't have any lower-text like it's found in Sana'a's manuscript.
Now, note analysis of Sana'a's manuscript Indicated that the old parchment had a 95% probability of belonging to the period between 578 CE and 669 CE. We can't have exact dates for both of these manuscripts, unless we analysis inks but that would be really difficult to carbon-date because it's sure to be contaminated by parchment's content hence can give wrong values.
---
Also to mention, there're were copies of Quran most notable those of "Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy b. Ka'b". And they had slight variations but research points out these were personal copies of Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy b. Ka'b and they didn't intend to show them to public hence had written certain verses into text of Quran. These "certain verses" were actually lines/prayers Prophet Muhammad used to make for example before prayer which also appear in certain Hadiths. That means Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy b. Ka'b had added personal notes/prayers into original text of Quran which seemed as they had different versions of Quran. I can show you examples if you want.
---
So, I wanted to say we should be cautious for 2 reasons:
1. This might be a similar case where someone has his/her personal variations/notes etc. embedded into text. So it be possible, if the lower text was something that was not widely accepted in early Muslim community and hence not represent them accurately but was work of a minority/person in early Muslim community. But yes, the re-writing of Uthman's Quran upon it does raise questions.
2. Sana'a's Manuscript consists of about 15000 pieces, and not all of them have been studied/analysed. A lot of work is needed. It's only partially analysed.
---
Furthermore according research, the comparison of upper text of Sana'a's manuscript and Birmingham Quran Manuscript shows "first results, based on character analysis and word analysis, have shown that the two old folios are very similar to their corresponding part contained in the present Quran (Uthmanic compilation). Furthermore, the comparison between Birmingham folios (corresponding to folios 3-4) and Sanaa folio (referenced by 029006B), which correspond to the end of chapter 19 and the beginning of chapter 20, shows that the two texts present a great similarity too."
This means upper text of Sana'a's manuscript and Birmingham Quran Manuscript are similar as those of Uthman's standard Quran.
This is the research paper if you wanna read: www.researchgate.net/publication/328215240_STATISTICAL_ANALYSIS_OF_THE_BIRMINGHAM_QURAN_FOLIOS_AND_COMPARISON_WITH_THE_SANAA_MANUSCRIPTS
---
But yes, lower text does raise questions! But we can't be sure if it was widely accepted or just work of a group of people/person done to keep it for themselves.
Also, Codex Parisino-petropolitanus' manuscript is dated almost to same period as that of Sana'a's manuscript but it's in alignment with Uthmanic Quran.
I'm not trying to be Muslim apologetic here, but just saying we need to be cautious and do more research.
bro ur are right , i more thing i would like to add is that , its already mentioned in authentic hadiths that there used to some people at the time of prophet muhammad(PBUH) who wrote the quran in their own words to memorize it , so its nothing new it the just conformation of these hadiths . So, this particular script is just personal notes of someone and when someone found these notes (it may be same person whose personal notes they were) and realized there is some mistake i made he corrected this. But these ex- muslims knowledge of islam made me laugh, but what can we do , we can just pray for them. Peace
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Quran is not preserved through written text but through the hearts of believers.
"Rather, the Qur'an is distinct verses [preserved] within the breasts of those who have been given knowledge. And none reject Our verses except the wrongdoers." Quran 29: 49
is Sana manuscript any official copy or just writing of a scribe who made some mistakes while writing? While islam bashers try to find the differences it has and use this to show how Quran has changed, Muslims see how it is so similar to current Quran and see as proof of Quran preservation.
so you mean the quran is preserved in the hearts of the believers - no faulty memory anywhere - but it had variants - so Allah preserved many "true" versions - in the HEARTs of the believers.. HAHAHAHAHAHA
@@greymanBB it was actually preserved distinctly and millions memorised it per every generation
@@edp-xo1on I can believe that many have memorized it. But memorizing through the centuries with no faults at all is simply not true.
And Muhammad did not write it down. It was recalled from faulty memory long after his death, from various people. Apparently , some one else wrote a few parts down, and that was lost…. Because…..it was eaten by a goat. Th word of GOD was eaten by goats. You will never really know what Muhammad said. Or made up.
Now tell me what difference it makes that many memorized it over centuries. Not a damn thing.
Lol wtf
I always thought that the Koran is word for word dictation by Angle Gobriel to Mohamed. Why now the variance? A single variance between the current and past korans is enough to shatter the myth of dictation.
ruclips.net/video/K6fAZ7xW53Y/видео.html
this will help u to understand
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
And this earth shattering finding is.....wait for it......drum roll please......a student's exercise book! Against it are scores of attested and identical manuscripts in varying degrees of completeness, many of which have been radiocarbon dated. I wonder which one I will believe......
Imagine if they find the original page 1 of the Quran, "the following is a work of fiction and isn't based on real characters"
As you wish
Lmaoo
Ibn shanabudh, a Qur'an scholar who recited variant readings(qira'at) of quran outside the 7 readings picked by ibn mujahid was tortured, forced to repent and jailed. Ibn mujahid used his political influence to canonize the 7readings he picked and legally prohibit the recitation of other readings.
There are so many variant readings of Qur'an that Abul-al-qasim-al-hudhali collected "50 eponymous readings" in his qira'at compendium.
Wow this is very interesting. Thanks for sharing!
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
They leave islam and now you have become an islamic scholar. 👩🏫
Abdullah Sir, this is the best video you have made so far! Keep up the good work and educate all humanity. Save this world!
ruclips.net/video/HnhJokcNZPw/видео.html
Truth about Sanna manuscripts
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
1 hour refuting this claims.
We don’t care what’s in the lower text. That was erased.
If we are to judge the preservation of the Quran, we only use the upper text that was written for reference. Because the lower text must have been erased for a reason dummy…it wasn’t the accurate version.
If anything, this shows that back then there must have been a rigorous checking system when writing a Quran to ensure that it is unchanged letter for letter. Probably there may have been a scribe and a memorizer, who kept correcting the scribe as he is writing down the Quran and that’s how they were written back then.
Anyway I hope you find happiness and peace with your belief.
There were five stages of quran cononization :
1. By Uthman in 650.
2. Selection of 7 readings (qira'at) by ibn mujahid in the 10th century.
3. Selection of 2 transmitted variants (riwaaya) each for the 7 readings by Al-dani and Al-shatibi in the 11th century.
4. Addition of 3 more readings and their two transmitted versions each by al-jazari in the 15th century. Thus 10 qira'at and 20 riwaaya were canonized and "DECLARED DIVINE" . Thus "OFFICIALY" there are "20 QURAN VARIANTS".
5. Choosing of 'Hafs an asim' as the official quranic text by al-azhar in Cairo in 1923.
Uthman burned the rest of the quranic materials during codification and al-azhar drowned the quranic variants other than 'Hafs an asim' in the river Nile.
So it's basically ibn mujahid, al-jazari, al-dani and al-shatibi who chose all these 10 qiraat and their 2 transmitted versions (riwaaya) each according to their wish and canonized these Quran variants by declaring them "DIVINE".
In addition to all these 20 canonized quran variants there are several shādhdha qurans. Shādhdha means anomalous, deviant, odd, isolated or irregular.
Google has more knowledge then Allah!! 🙂
Do you Comply? . your God is Google ?
Do you Comply?
Google is only a tool to get tiny weeny bitty of God's knowledge.
Google doesn't know when you're going to die. LOL
@@djaelanid1923 please ask frm ur Alla....whwn will I die......at least we ask questions to google and get satisfying answers from it.
they used manuscript over and over again, writing, erasing, and so on.
Astaghfar go and increse your knowledge Allah hu akbar
Will be a shock to many. And they will refuse to believe it anyway, as usual!
Shock to many loool. They were found decades ago!
@@abdullahk9606 and revealed, today, with new technology, that shows, Islam is well, fake
Abdullah K@ and brought to more lights today.
@@abdullahk9606 You obviously missed the point. It is not the finding but what was found about the find! 😂😂😂! They found that the quran had human help by way of writing, erasing and overwriting!
@@carolinebee7951 was this a recent discovery? Or are you broadcasting decades old news? If you think Sameer knows anything ask him to debate me. I bet he won't and if he does he wouldn't stand a chance!
Ali dawah will watch the video and skip because he is afraid to reply 😂
@Satya Murthy Mk I still can't believe there are so many Muslims who are blindly following this religion and doing all those pagan rituals for nothing, they spend their whole life over this relgion just to end up in hell
BiG-C Official . lol, don't twist the facts.. be honest.
The real fact is you christians doing pagan celebration every year.
I can say more but it would be too harsh so i better just keep it.
A M . Muslims believe Jesus had a beautiful personality indeed..
We believe him as one of the mightiest Prophet.
Regarding the rape, i don't believe that.
Omg, this Satya Murthy Mk is a Big Liar.
His name sounds like an Indian name.
Most of Indian population hate Dr.Zakir Naik, since they are Hindu believers.
A M . OMG, you have MISQUOTED and gave the wrong verse.
Where did you get that information?
Great video. True it was man who change Allah's words.
No actually it was man who changed the words of another man who claimed they were Allah's words
Great Upload Sameer! Please upload more videos like this; presenting hard evidence is such a great resource in showing the criticisms of Islam.
We don’t care what’s in the lower text. That was erased.
If we are to judge the preservation of the Quran, we only use the upper text that was written for reference. Because the lower text must have been erased for a reason dummy…it wasn’t the accurate version.
If anything, this shows that back then there must have been a rigorous checking system when writing a Quran to ensure that it is unchanged letter for letter. Probably there may have been a scribe and a memorizer, who kept correcting the scribe as he is writing down the Quran and that’s how they were written back then.
Anyway I hope you find happiness and peace with your belief.
The Sanaa Manuscript were most likely notes of a student who was taking dictation from his teacher, as there is the text “do not recite Bismillah here” in the undertext, showing the student wrote just as he heard from his teacher. It was most likely someone studying the Quran and putting notes. There are no core differences between Sanaa Manuscripts and Quran we read today, except for different prefixes and pronouns here and there, which is a result of different accents and methods used to recite the Quran. The meaning has not changed. It was somebody taking notes and learning.
I think you could have been clear that the dating is only for the parchment not the ink on that parchment. We don't know when the text was written.
The whole Uthmanic narrative, and the claim the modern Quran comporting with this canonization is itself apologetics, the oldest extant complete Qurans date from at least two centuries after Mo and Uthman, there is no extant Uthnanic quran. Even those later extant versions have variations, even modern versions have variations . The Sana'a typical of text this old lacks diacritical markings, so even the apparent conformity with extant texts is reverse engineered . A word found today could have been intended to have been a very different word originally. The meaning given was an interpretative act , someone today presuming it is correct and then reversing this meaning back into the earlier text ( with no diacritical marks where the same text can have much more ambiguity in meaning ) is itself a confirmation bias.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
We all know that the Qur'an is also preserved as an oral tradition, which is why we know how to read the consonantal text. People did not store parchment for decades. It was a scarce resource, and was used shortly after its creation. Even if the ink was dated, the next objection would be "Oh maybe the ink was stored for a hundred years before it was used".
The hard facts as they are support the traditional narrative that the Qur'an was preserved in the form given to the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessing be upon him).
@@paghal11
"which is why we know how to read the consonantal text."
But you do not , there is a hadith where two sahabah from the same tribe, so same dialect end up practically in a fight over their recitation variations.
Your own tradition talks of variations , so obviously even if memorised there would be variations in consonants.
"People did not store parchment for decades. It was a scarce resource, and was used shortly after its creation. "
That is a possible , but not certain.
"Even if the ink was dated, the next objection would be "Oh maybe the ink was stored for a hundred years before it was used".
The ink dating is irrelevant , ink does not come from a living thing, so Carbon dating cannot be used on it. That is why there is no dating for the ink, which means all you can date is the parchment not when the ink ended up on it.
"The hard facts as they are support the traditional narrative that the Qur'an was preserved"
Your tradition says there were variants in the texts and even the number of sura. It also says verses were lost . Your tradition contradicts what you say the tradition says.
This "perfect" preservation narrative at this point is a joke.
This is the one shows that Qurans are different against what Muslims claim.
Thank you for the video. I have now become a bigger believer in Islam. ❤️❤️❤️❤️
How???
he just told you with hard evidence that the whole book is a pure human fabrication edited a million times, and you say that you have now become a bigger believer, this is plain stupidity from your side.
Share it to make your friends and family become better Muslims.😂
@@mistmurth We don’t care what’s in the lower text. That was erased.
If we are to judge the preservation of the Quran, we only use the upper text that was written for reference. Because the lower text must have been erased for a reason dummy…it wasn’t the accurate version.
If anything, this shows that back then there must have been a rigorous checking system when writing a Quran to ensure that it is unchanged letter for letter. Probably there may have been a scribe and a memorizer, who kept correcting the scribe as he is writing down the Quran and that’s how they were written back then.
Anyway I hope you find happiness and peace with your belief.
@@omarmansour6766
1 your reply is proof that you admit that your quran is corrupted, there is a lower text and an upper text, who decided that one text is better than the other assuming that allah has revealed only one version of the text.
2 did you read the story of abdullah bin saad bin abi sarah, he was a scriber to mohamed, he left islam (one of the first ones to leave it) do you know why, well as he was scribing the quran, he altered some surats, when he told mohamed that this alteration is from me, mohamed never objected, he actually liked it, so abdullah bin saad bin abi sarah was surprised how come mohamed never objected the alteration of the words of allah, so he decided to leave islam and fled. read Sirat Ibnu Hisham
3 the quran is written 100% based on the memorization of the old scribers 60 years after the death of mohamed, how can some one declare that it is exactly how it was reavealed
4 the only reason any text was erased or altered as you are suggesting, it is pure proof that your quran is a pure fabrication of men for men
you should read more than one book in order for you to understand that islam is a fake religion that was fabricated by mohamed in order for him to fulfill his sexual perversions, his thirst power, his slave trade, his war mongering, his love for money and wealth
One dude cannot receive from an angel with no witness ,maybe Muhammad was hallucinating
Loved the impression of Noumam Ali khan 👍
Any religion (Islam) that promotes polygamy and marriage to your first cousin is not from God. I find it hard to believe God would sanction behavior that is absolutely destructive to his creation.
Sadeghi then pointed out, “For historical reasons, however, what is of greater interest is the probability that the parchment is older than a certain date. … The probability that the parchment is older than AD 646 is 75.1 %, or a three-to-one likelihood. It is highly probable therefore, that the Ṣanʿāʾ I manuscript was produced no more than 15 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad.”[43] He concluded that the scriptio inferior text belonged to the period of the companions of Prophet Muhammad, whilst the scriptio superior text belonged to the ʿUthmānic tradition, and using stemmatics, the ʿUthmānic tradition was shown to give the most accurate reproduction of the Prophetic prototype.
a parchment can stay decades without being writen over
Thank you for talking about this. Much needed.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Even if a text/book is perfectly preserved this doesn't automatically make the contents in it true -"Mein Kampf" by Hitler and "Das Kapital" by Karl Marx are probably perfectly preserved from their originals but is the content in each necessarily true?
Mein Kampf is.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
We love the tittle in Indonesia language thanks sameer, Indonesia the biggest abdools in the world & get lost by islam, you can see it right? Keep it on Indonesia language to atractive many abdools, God will bless your job brother.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
What would you do if they said " it just one of the 7 variants of quran mentioned by muhamad on the Hadits"
@@royssche The 7 ahruf was a ridiculous idea Muhammad came up with especially when he gave synonyms! What for? If a language is foreign to someone, how can giving synonyms make it easier? This daft idea of the 7 ahruf eventually became banned by Uthman by his standardisation. All other variants to be destroyed which is why Ibn Masud was upset and told his followers to hide his mushaf. The 7 ahruf idea just shows that Muhammad doesn't know what he is doing. Even a primary school child can see that this will end up in arguments.
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
Bottom line is, if there are diacritical marks on this Qur'an, it cannot be from Muhammads time. There were NO diacritical marks in Muhammads time.
Excellent! Thanks for proving that it is simply a late bad copy, and the earlier good copies (without vowel marks) and which all agree with each other, are the ones we should concentrate on.
@@paghal11 But there AREN'T ANY early copies of Qur'an! If there were, you would ALREADY HAVE IT! Goofball! And if there were a copy, like say, the Sa'ana from Yemeni, WHY isn't that manuscript in distribution NOW? Because it doesn't come NEAR to the present day Qur'an. Ask yourself why that Sa'ana manuscript hasn't been published? Your whole religion is based on erroneous texts. Read the Gospel and find who God truly is.
Thanks brother. God bless you
From Brazil
It is sad, when people believe lies. But also it says a lot about the people who are willing to look deeper and realize. Thanks Abdullah, love the t-shirt by the way.
Thanks for the info, Bro!
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
the quote you took from wikipedia is followed by this: "However with the radiocarbon-dating of the Birmingham Quran manuscript to before the year 645 with a 95.4% accuracy, the latter is believed to be older then the Sana'a manuscript, and is seen as the oldest Quran manuscript."
Great impression of Nouman Ali Khan.
@Satya Murthy Mk Thank you for this.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Every oppressive theocratic government in the Muslim world, and every Jihad group bases their authority on the premise that the Qur'an is the unchanged word of God... If that premise is proven false... then everything crumbles, and even Muhammad's claim to be the ultimate prophet of God, is in doubt. This is wonderful news for all humanity! :)
Thanks Abdullah!
Truth about Sanna manuscripts
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
1 hour refuting this claims.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
I heard that the Quran used mostly today is a version....of the Hafs text that was edited and compiled by the Egyptian School Board in the 1920's and adopted as a standardised text in 1924 in Cairo. In 1984 The King of Saudi Arabia also authorised this text. Yet it is now known that over 30 different, and I mean with serious differences, versions of the Quran are printed and available today.
The claim of supernatural unchanged Quranic text cannot be maintained in light of this information we have today.
If Uthman did indeed destroy many of the verses recited to him / scholars of that day by the 'faithful reciters', then we cannot rely on texts that followed that event including the Hafs. The Sana'a text seems to confirm that case and does cast some doubt on the veracity of what is published today as being an 'unchanged Quran'.
Maybe more serious research is needed and a good long introspection into the motives of Uthman and those who followed him with commentaries that shaped Islam into what it is today? What will they find?
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Can I have your permission to download and add subtitles ?
I would love it! See here for details
abdullahsameer.com/blog/contribute-subtitles/
Arab started putting dots on the letters during the ummayad khilafa and the signs 100-200 after that , Sanaa text has dots and signs.
Brother just have a look at the Birmingham manuscript of the Qur'an... and maybe you will know that indeed Allah is the one who will preserve it..
Did you not watch the video😂😂
@@ottopotatum5775 The Sana'a lower text is a bad copy, which was not propagated to other manuscripts, nor does it have an "isnaad" (chain of transmission). It has been dismissed by all serious scholars as a "personal study Qur'an", not meant for distribution as the final product. Full of spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, omissions etc. Maybe it was written by a scholar of the New Testament, hahaha!!
The Sanaa text, among other things, demonstrates the evolution of the Quran as a human creation. Just as the canonical books of the New Testament were ultimately decided by church patriarchs, Uthman and subsequent Islamic clergy decided what "God said." It was clearly not the word of a perfect God to "his messenger," unless God changed his mind between the pre-Uthmanic recitations to the post-Uthmanic ones.
💡
Have you heard about the Birmingham, England manuscript, found in 2015?
Of course he has, but he's not going to discuss that now, is he?
Great video as usual!
Finally Quranic textual criticism is a thing. Will be fascinating to see the results of such studies.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
Surprise surprise Quran didn't change or anything what they found is about 5000 pages of manuscript, does the Quran need all of these pages and paper of course not but students learn Quran in a big mosque need for that there are erasing and rewriting on the same page because they were making mistakes in writing because they were there to learn.
And all the so-called "changes" are not important for anyone to change they were not - for example - mocking Othman or anything to change them
Spread this reply if it made sense so no one would be misguided
It is waste of time. obviously the Qur’an is the Qur’an. It is not too much different than the Standard Qur’an, it is almost the same.
@@khaledaskalany510- Yeah keep telling yourself that
@@theguyver4934 it is the truth the Qur’an is the only book in the history of humanity that still almost the same since written 1400 years ago what evere you believe that it is a revelation of God or not, good book or bad book, it is still the same book
wonderful new things i have learned. Thank you
There is no Uthmanic Qur'an today. This is a category mistake.
@Zack Smith No the point is not invalid. I am saying that there is no Qur'an in existence from the time of Uthman. This is what the leading Qur'anic scholars in Turkey have said. As far as meaning goes, you have to look at each verse in order to come to that conclusion.
Absolutely correct, Prabhu. Western scholars have ascertained as much. Modern people generally don't realise what a monumental undertaking the assemblage of these kind of books was back then, or how time-consuming that activity was. Writing and compiling something like this would always have been a state-sponsored exercise, and in the time of Uthman there was simply no state to speak of. Not until the time of Muawiya was there any stability, and not until the time of Abd el Malik was there any recognisable Islamic state (i.e. with centralised institutions and strong coercive powers). All the available evidence points to the collection of this as occurring during Abd el Malik's reign. This began decades after the death of Uthman.
@@davidmontoute2074 Very good points. The end of the 7th century is where the story begins, a story about Arab rulers appropriating for themselves an obscure "Arab" religious movement. And this religion takes a couple of centuries to develop fully.
Definitely. I think the doctrine fully crystalises when the Ulemaa rise to power in the mid 9th century. Unfortunately, they designed their legal system in such a way that it would resist all fundamental change. And today modern Muslims drag this thing around like a rotten corpse.
Truth about Sanna manuscripts
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
1 hour refuting this claims and establishing the preservation of the Quran.
623-669 CE? The carbon dating is pretty much irrelevant, because people can simply store the papers and use it 100 years later. François Déroche puts the lower text to the second half of the 7th century, due to the writing style..
Abdullah sameer thanks for your research, u made my imaan much stronger
how many would attack Islam. the more truth is proven
Is it possible that these were notes, written in a summary format.
I am an ex-Muslim. I am only just watching your videos. Brilliant! I am so glad to have found out about your work. All the best.
hahah.. and so sad he got refuted becoz of his lies ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
i hope you come back to islam Insha allah
ruclips.net/video/K6fAZ7xW53Y/видео.html
Truth about Sanna manuscripts
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
1 hour refuting this claims.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
I thoroughly enjoy this channel you've got some great content! I am curious as to why this claim is still made that the Quran is unchanged. It is very possible! Was the original written in Arabic or Aramaic? And what about all the different versions of the Quran - 31 that I know of?! Also, didn't the followers of Mohammad all live at different times?
are you kidding me? They Quran was sent in arabic language not aramaic
very good point, this shows that the qu'ran has been changed, and that there were others versions of it..all this things point out an human origin..
There is no other version rather than Othman version, and there is no real changes except some little educational mistakes
bah a classical theme in the islamic vues...but it doesn't take any account of the reality...@@khaledaskalany510
Othman RA himself was a companion or disciple of the prophet ﷺ who memorised the Quran. If anybody is an expert on the Quran it’s Othman and the rest of the companions, no one else.
The Quran was standardised very early on and for that reason alone, it’s still remains preserved to this day.
You can make all the videos you want attacking the Quran but at the end of the day it’s Allah ﷻ who will protect His Book.
Yes bro
If you are genuinely interested in the truth, you need to keep an open mind.
As a Christian I find this info interesting. Thanks for sharing this in a short concise way, Sameer! (Btw, cool beard) :-)
Mr Sameer
Uthman destroyed copies of their personal Quran that were written down from their own memory. Some copies weren't verified as accurate. The Quran we have today is a collection of chapters that are identical in memorization, so they were labeled as accurate and made into a book. That Quran you have is an inaccurate personal Quran that wasn't included because it was different than what the majority had memorized. That Quran could be a paraphrased one, it could be one that the writer had made mistakes when copying it down, or maybe the writer had forgotten some bits and replaced them. That Quran is sort of like the Bible today, it has been altered.
Please read your history properly.
Uthman was a Quran burner.
Lol
@@AbdullahSameerVideos, although i'm not a David Wood fan, this sketch is pretty amusing: ruclips.net/video/qpHjdF-t5TU/видео.html
No, he give usthat(teacher) to pronance Quran in same sounds. He not burn the Quran he just teach a people how to read.
ruclips.net/video/K6fAZ7xW53Y/видео.html
for more info
Wow... I'm speechless.
It's so obvious: there were many Qur'ans in Jordan/Syria at the time.
Here are all the variants in the Sana palimpsest ruclips.net/video/XyfML3DIAwY/видео.html
throughout the video the differences have been called "significant". This is an opinion and I respect it. However, to me the differences are minor, but that said, there are some interesting theories put forward by Muslim and non-Muslim scholars alike, in academic literature regarding the Sanaa manuscript. This is not the place for a true academic discussion and I recommend people with genuine interest in the subject to take a look in the academic literature regarding the subject.
I also refer serious investigators to look up the "Birmingham manuscript" which is probably the earliest Quran manuscript we have today. I do not engage in conversations in non-academic environment so I will leave it there. Best wishes.
edit: Just wanted to add one point that I see often goes unmentioned when discussing these early manuscripts of the Quran: while a gazillion of things can happen to written texts and that is something that can be preserved for us to see a thousand or so years later, we can never know the degree to which the genuine and the far far more widespread method of promulgation of Quran - oral transmission via memorization - has been preserved over the same timeframe. This is a highly crucial point, which sadly too often goes undiscussed even in critical discussions. This is highly crucial point for a number of reasons, one of which is that the oral (memorized) tradition actually allows for one more way, besides the writing form, to preserve the Quran as is and actually allows for double-checking the integrity of the written form. One question then could be, well, how can we then ever know whether the memorized version itself has been preserved? The answer is, it is impossible to know. For me personally, I think that if there is AT LEAST one early manuscript where the ENTIRETY of whatever is still legible does not conform to the standard version, then I would believe that the integrity of the original Quran had not been preserved at least in one instance, and so the Muslim belief, that Quran's text will never change, is wrong. So far, we have the Sanaa and the Birmingham manuscripts as two earliest texts available to us. In one of these (Sanaa), the text highly similar to the standard version CAN be found in it, and in the other (Birmingham), the entire text conforms almost completely to the standard version.
Quite frankly, it is up to the individual how they approach these evidences and then interpret them and then decide on their faith. All of what I have said is known to non-Muslims, ex-Muslims, a secular Muslim and a practising Muslim and yet everyone seems to have gone after the persuasions of their heart, as the great psychologist, the Quran mentions, for good or for worse, but in any case, all views must be respected. Time will certainly tell the outcome of each these positions. As an academic, I reserve my judgment until more studies are done on this and hopefully more manuscripts are uncovered. Let's see.
The preservation of Quran mainly depend on the memorization not writing ,and the writing just add more confirmation but it is not the main source.Quran is a different book which easy to memorized in arabic and there are touthands of memorizers in each generation of Muslims since the time of prophet. it means if there is any copy of the Qur’an today any one of the good memorizers can write the whole Quran from his mind and other memorizers can check this Quran specially if we got touthands of them,so there is no way that all of them are wrong.until today the main method to learn Quran is to read it in front of A proficient reader and memorizer of the Qur’an , while it is not enough to depend on the written text of Quran without taking it from a proficient memorizer, who must have testimony that he learned the Qur’an from his master who should be a proficient memorizer as well, and thus the chain must extend to reach the Companions and then the Prophet. Therefore, manuscripts do not prove anything because they are not the original means of transmitting the Qur’an, in the most correct sense, Manuscripts are presented to the reading of thousands of master memorizers of the Qur’an and corrected on their foundations, not the other way around, because the main way of preserving the Qur’an is by thousands of proficient memorizer in each generation, not the manuscripts.
Isn't the official narrative that there were variations and uthman destroyed them? Doesn't this just support the narrative?
Yes it does but it also highlights that if the Quran we have today is the perfect unerring word of god then why is this different? Why did it have to be corrected? Why is it so much younger than the story of the making of the physical Quran would imply?
Adam Adam , is there one "official narrative"? I thought Islam has no central hierarchy. No one seems to be able to produce an "Uthman version".
@@LlyneM-rf3gd
Maybe there isn't 1 official narrative.
People who put a like on their own comments are idiots.
Who would trust a man like Uthman whom during his time corruption was at its peak
So that would mean that the quran we know today is the version that Uthman composed of existing verses. He was basically the final editor and might have left certain verses out.
This wouldn’t have been such an issue if the muslims didn’t insist that the quran had been perfectly conserved. Clearly this isn’t the case.
You should of discussed this with an Islamic historian, but you won't. What's fascinating about History is that, the Quran will continue to be loved and memorised long after you die...you will be just a rearrangement of carbon forgotten
Bro,let the dogs keep on barking. Meanwhile just witnessed so many revert to Islam in my home town since Ramadan :) May God guide everybody back to the straight path. Salaam!
There is no impartial Muslim academic because of the intolerance of Islam.
Recently in Pakistan a biology professor was forced to recant under duress his views on evolution. So consulting a muslim historian will not help.
@@sb-fx6llYou should also report the thousands of Muslims leaving Islam in Iran and Indonesia despite the apostasy laws.
I love ur context .. I support 😎😎.. can’t wait for more .
After having said all these comments,if we remember the Surah Hakka the Ayats between 38 and 47 what we should think about them? Wasn’t it better to have a Kuran written and assisted by Muhammad (SAV) while he was living? Why he did not wright down himself the original one as revealed to him by Gabriel? Who can say that Kuran in total is authentic? Do we have the original copy of Uthmanic Kuran?Where is it?
Hope this helps many voodooed souls to wake up into our reality.
Truth about Sanna manuscripts
ruclips.net/video/3pcenpnMVVE/видео.html
1 hour refuting this claims.
Try to differentiate between the 'Qur'an' and the 'mushaf' both are two different things.
Where is the COMPLETE original quran of Uthman ?
It does not exist !
*Tunisia removes Islam as the state religion from its constitution*
Many Arab states closely watching the developments.
Pakistan should follow.
It is a blessing from God who is All-compassionate and All-Merciful that we are given this gift. As we Americans say, "don't look a gift horse in the mouth". Let this blessing be a joy that teaches us rather than one more intellectual game to dissuade us. For myself I get so very tired of self-identified scholars cajoling me on how to practice my Faith. God knows what I do and what I have to work on. If this gift is meant to find me, it will (Inshallah). Thanks for your video, but perhaps God will help you to employ more faith and less intellect. For myself the Quran could be written in ballpoint on paper towel and I would still be using it to seek the Straight Path.
congrats your brain is still in the 7th century
@@bharath952 No, I and my brain are in the 21st Century and I truly appreciate the hard work of modern scholars. I am also one who accepts that nothing is revealed of God save what He Wills. The Intuition that leads my Spirituality and the thinking that leads my Intellect are related, though one does not govern the other. As a result, I am grateful for academia but pray always for guidance. Further, in this way I can accept this newly discovered text for the blessing that it is; an effort by Man to preserve his best understanding of a Divine revelation. Alhamduillah FWIW.
@@bharath952 Don't you guys burn widows alive, lynch people for eating beef and can't share a meal with a "low caste" person? Who is in the 7th century?