Contemporary Issues: Is the Original Qur'an Preserved? - Dr. Joseph Lumbard
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 июн 2015
- Orientalist scholarship since the 19th century has proposed various theories that seek to disqualify the Muslim narrative on the authenticity of the Qur'anic compilation and the preservation of the text. The recent discovery of early Qur'an manuscripts in San'a has reinvigorated the issue, and skeptics have hoped for evidence to support their assertions. Bayan visiting faculty member Joseph Lumbard sheds some light on this issue.
Make sure to subscribe for more videos!
LIKE us on Facebook!
/ bayanclaremont
Visit our website:
bayan.us.org
![TRASH or PASS! Eminem ( Houdini ) [REACTION!!!]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/cB1WrZcMwMc/mqdefault.jpg)
Islamophobes getting real mad at this video lol. Alhamdulilah that I'm Muslim.
GGGGGGOD is greater than the author of the Quran
@@applegreen4118 The author of the Quran is God.
@@karimmohamedel-sharkawy4034 - why are you insulting God
@@applegreen4118 I'm not. I'm praising Him. You're the one insulting by not capitalizing the "G" in God.
@@karimmohamedel-sharkawy4034 - capital vs small letters - how fickle and pathetic your concept of The Almighty is 🧐
They say truth is stranger than fiction. People can’t handle actual truth, only ‘their idea’ of truth.
“Indeed, it is WE who sent down the MESSAGE (i.e. the Qur’an), and indeed, WE WILL BE ITS GUARDIAN.”
QS al-Hijr 15: 9
@imu70
Yeah, the Torah and Injil were reviled by Allah. He has not promised the keep those scriptures from being corrupted. But He has promised to keep the Quran safe from corruption.
Some say that he chooses to do that because the Quran is the last message from God. So makes sense for him to preserve it.
Also, sleeping is not an attribute of God.
@imu70
The Quran was compiled by Abubakar(RA) into a book form. During the time of Uthman(RA) the copies with others were burned, and a copy of the Quran was made from the Mushaf (compiled by Abubakar(RA), thats why it's called copying).
Plus the goat/sheep story you are telling me is not authentic! Prove to me (by giving me a reference) from any Sahih hadith about that story. We have a scientific way to approve or disapprove a hadith.
For Christians, you don't have a scientific method to say which bible is right/wrong.
I was browsing the gospel of Barnabas, then I saw that the name of Muhammad(SAW) was mentioned more than 30 times! No wonder why the Christians reject it.
I saw someone that reverted to Islam because of it. Check it here:
ruclips.net/video/UdydAKi8NBw/видео.html
@imu70
I don't know what you mean by Original, maybe you didn't read my message correctly.
In our case, the collectors of the hadith came up with criteria which they used to classify how authentic the information they were collecting was. For example, Imam Bukhari has his Sahih and non-Sahin collection of hadith. Christians collect the non-Sahih and tell you that it's from Sahih Bukhari (don't even know the difference).
I don't believe in the gospel of Barnabas (and no Muslim beliefs in it too), I just wanted to check why Christians reject it. Gospel of Barnabas, Marry (yeah it's out there), Jonh, Mathew, etc, it's all the same to me.
And by the way, I worship the "LIVING GOD OF THE BIBLE", the one who Jesus(AS) worshiped in the bible. You, on the other hand, are worshiping Jesus(AS), and he never instructed you to do that (even in your bible)!
@imu70
When the Quran was relived, it was written on skins etc, then Abubakar(RA) compiled it, in a collection, then Uthman(RA) copied from that, and distributed to other kingdoms. So there was only one copy which was duplicated.
With regards to what we worship:
Quran[41:37]: "And of His signs are the night and day and the sun and moon. Do not prostrate to the sun or to the moon, but prostate to Allah , who created them, if it should be Him that you worship."
That says it all.
Hindu scripture? LOL. I wont even answer that.
You should worship the one who Jesus(AS) worshiped, and stop worshiping Jesus(AS).
@imu70
You need to read your reference correctly.
Ibrahim was the kind of Muslim that Jesus was.
(إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ )
(Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian)
15:9
How do you explain the fact that the earliest Quran are several years after Muhammad the creator of islam, how do you explain the fact that a christian child story from 500 AD "seven sleepers" were copied and put in the Quran? look it up!
Can someone tell me why there are two different spellings of the Prophet Elijah in the same Quran chapter?
Quran 37:123
وَاِنَّ اِلۡيَاسَ لَمِنَ الۡمُرۡسَلِيۡنَؕ
Quran 37:130
سَلٰمٌ عَلٰٓى اِلۡ يَاسِيۡنَ
The verse 130 is pronounced El-ya-sin Also the recitation is pronounced differently as shown in the source
Elijah means my God is Yahweh
Eli=Elohim
Yah =Yahweh
This is my source
www.islamicstudies.info/tafheem.php?sura=37&verse=123&to=130
@@visionx46 my main point is there is variance in the same chapter for the name Elias. Why is there a difference? If there are two different dialects in the same chapter then there are inconsistencies in the Quran.
quran.com/37/123
Elijah is spelt and pronounced Elias
اِلۡيَاسَ
quran.com/37/130
Elijah is spelt and pronounced El-ya-sin
اِلۡ يَاسِيۡنَ
Hhhhhhhhh go worship your stone
@@heathersoares186 ruclips.net/video/8hj7u0F3yEg/видео.html
All those people who are saying there are different Qur'ans due to the existence of apparent variations are wrong on two counts: (1) the variations (of 7 well known types) are in matters of pronunciation and not meaning (2) the Muslims have been reciting the Qur'an in their prayers 5 times a day (minimum) from the beginning of the Prophet's mission as the final messenger until today. This means the community learnt the Qur'an in the presence of the Prophet and then proceeded to practice it unrelentingly in their 5 daily prayers. They then passed it down to the succeeding generations of Muslims, both in oral and then, later, in written form once the text had been codified. This happened on such a large scale as to preclude the possibility of (a) forgetting it and/or (b) conspiring to have it changed in even a very minor way. In short, there is no doubt about the Qur'an's preservation as it was revealed to the Prophet until today. Furthermore, if any still doubt it's origins are other than from God, then those people need to bring into being a text of a similar nature. Since the Arabic construction of the Qur'an is unique and unparalleled this is held to be impossible!
yes thank you the quran is a soundly passed on book not only written we have something we call it tagwid .we pronounce every letter and word as the prophet pronounced it .
Stephen, the problem is that the diacritic marks are more than just aids to pronunciation. They also change the words, and the meaning.
Further more, there are known to be at least 31 different Korans. That is, the diacritic marks are different and so the text expresses different meanings.
Further still, the earliest known Korans, which post date the Uthmanic Korans, all have edits, such as insertions, deletions, additional diacritic marks, etc.
I am pretty sure that you will not believe me, but will you belief the word and work of native Arabic speakers, and see the actual changes to the Sanna, Topkapi, Samarkhand etc?
Take a look at ruclips.net/video/9lqQBVtUWvo/видео.html
There are known to be lost verses. Mohammed gave out different versions of the same verse.
The Koran is a mess, with errors, and cannot be the word of God, but a man.
Perfectly correct, Roosje. Much of the Koran was man made. Much of it was known material of the time, then imported to Islamic text.
The verse 5:32 is a classic example
That is the one about "kill one man and you kill a nation, save one man and you save a nation"
The start of the verse actually
"Sahih International
Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul ..."
The context is the killing of Cain by Abel. The previous two verses are about that. So killing Cain, Abel also killed his sons, who would become nations.
That text comes from the Jewish text, Mishnah Sanhedrin, 4.5
en.wikisource.org/wiki/Translation:Mishnah/Seder_Nezikin/Tractate_Sanhedrin/Chapter_4/5
Cassandra Britannia
Wow. You a magician?? Keep pulling things out your rear.
@@cassandrabritannia7852 well that was of the difference between dialects. In some cases when Prophet himself and other people were trying to teach Quran to outsiders expecially Adnanis (northern Arabs) were having difficulties to rightly pronounce some Khureyshi diealect. Because of that till they are able to pronounce it better, sahabis or the prophet himself let the newcomers use similar words that they having hard time to pronounce corectly in original.
But you are free to do any speculation further, becuase God does not forbid that. Also your reference is nothing new, we are aware of the differences in those texts which are no way near any complete change in meaning. They vary on trivial issues like what you get when you are in heaven. You can say "ahaa" but then I should ask you "Are so unaware of the concept of heaven to care about this?".
I am following Qur'an from today, very seriously
Still following?
How is it going bro
Hopefully you read it.
May ALLAH Guide You!
Glad you dumped it
millions of hearts that have memorized the holy Quran in itself is the greatest proof of the originalty of it and is a living and testifyable miraclefor all those forallthose who have thinking and objectives brains.........but a biased blind cannot see the open truth
Mr Nine correct
Aisha said the vers of stoning and breastfeeding the men was eaten by a goat OK but if Quran was memorized by millions why did that vers not make it into Quran how many more verses did not make it ?
compare Jesus and horny pagan stone kissing Muhammad warlord had sex with a child and sex with a slave in his wifes (hafsa) bed did not know if Iblis or Jibril was revealing a message (satanic verses) listen and refute Chriatian Prince if you can and stop following shaytan
@@Shadow0.0001 Allah did preserve 30 + Qurans take your pick
1, Qaloon Qur'an
2, Al- susi(ibn-katheer) Qur'an
3,Khaled QUR'AN
4,Idrees QUR'AN
5,warsh Qur'an
6, Hafs Ad- Dury (Abu - Amro alBasri) QUR'AN
7,Al- Laith QUR'AN
8,Al- Bazzi Qur'an
9,Al- Azraq QUR'AN
10,As - Susi (Abu Amro alBasri) QUR'AN
11,Ad - Dury(alkisa'i) QUR'AN
12, Ibn shanboodh Qur'an
13,Al- Asbahaani QUR'AN
14,Hisham QUR'AN
15,Ibn Dhakwan QUR'AN
16,Isa BinWardan QUR'AN
17,Sulayman QUR'AN
18, Ibn Jammaz QUR'AN
19,Ahmad bin Farah QUR'AN
20,Qunbul Qur'an
21,Showba QUR'AN
22, Ruwais QUR'AN
23,Shujaa' bin Abi Nasr Al- Balakhi QUR'AN
24, Abu Amro Al -Ala QUR'AN
25,Hafs QUR'AN
26, Ruh QUR'AN
27, Al- Dury(Al Hasan AlBasri) QUR'AN
28, Hafs Al - Dury(ibn kathir) QUR'AN
29,khalf QUR'AN
30,Ishaq QUR'AN
31,Al Hasan bin Said Al- Matuu'l QUR'AN
32, Abu- Farah Al- Shan - budhi QUR'AN
@Tom Harry this is what Yasir Qadhi means when he says ppl have been regurgitating the same thing over and over .
The is no oroginal Mushaf. Even Mushaf Uthmani could not be preserved. Uthman went to a lot of trouble writing only obe official version and ordered to burn everything else .
Today if you open any arabic Quran it will say on the first page "recitation by so an so" (arabic rriwaya) recitation by hafs or warsh or whatever.
See Hatun Tash video of the many different Quran recitations with different words. I do not even care if Quran was preserved word by word its the Muslims that say so.I understand the Muslims have to bel what the Quran tells them. I do not I go by facts.
Muhammad spoke quraishi dialect which has nothing to do with modern standatd arabic which is for expl. Hafs Cairo edition 1924.
Different Arabic Qur'ans
1, Qaloon Qur'an
2, Al- susi(ibn-katheer) Qur'an
3,Khaled QUR'AN
4,Idrees QUR'AN
5,warsh Qur'an
6, Hafs Ad- Dury (Abu - Amro alBasri) QUR'AN
7,Al- Laith QUR'AN
8,Al- Bazzi Qur'an
9,Al- Azraq QUR'AN
10,As - Susi (Abu Amro alBasri) QUR'AN
11,Ad - Dury(alkisa'i) QUR'AN
12, Ibn shanboodh Qur'an
13,Al- Asbahaani QUR'AN
14,Hisham QUR'AN
15,Ibn Dhakwan QUR'AN
16,Isa BinWardan QUR'AN
17,Sulayman QUR'AN
18, Ibn Jammaz QUR'AN
19,Ahmad bin Farah QUR'AN
20,Qunbul Qur'an
21,Showba QUR'AN
22, Ruwais QUR'AN
23,Shujaa' bin Abi Nasr Al- Balakhi QUR'AN
24, Abu Amro Al -Ala QUR'AN
25,Hafs QUR'AN
26, Ruh QUR'AN
27, Al- Dury(Al Hasan AlBasri) QUR'AN
28, Hafs Al - Dury(ibn kathir) QUR'AN
29,khalf QUR'AN
30,Ishaq QUR'AN
31,Al Hasan bin Said Al- Matuu'l QUR'AN
32, Abu- Farah Al- Shan - budhi QUR'AN
If you can't handle the true step aside because through research and a lot of hard work Dr. Joseph has explained the topic. We love you in Islam.
Not2Yield and IsaNot PaganJesus shame on you both you are swearing at prophets may god revenge of you both
Henry Santiago no that's your claim the quran isn't an arabian mythology and all what you have said is wrong so that's your claim and that's not true.
IsaNot PaganJesus i didn't say that on my prophet isa (jesus) you said that you are accusing me and when you swear at jesus and saying he is a pagan no his not he is son of mary and they believe that he is son of mary he is the massieh you are swearing at him.and not only because i pray that god revenge from you .he will cause you swear at his prophet he will punish you for that unless you repent
Henry Santiago the quran is originated from god and we have the original writings of antiquity the quran was written in the time of the prophet the prophet recite quran and some of the companions wrote after him and after his death the caliphate abu bakr collected the quran so it was written in the time of the prophet but not collected in one book so the companions did that and preserved this copy in aby bakr house then in umar house then in hafsa daughter of umar house then in uttman house and the other copies that was written he burned them there was other copies cause companions wrote in the time of the prophet but with out the intention of collecting the quran so they wrote interpretations beside their writings of the quran so uttman burned these copies cause he was afraid that people think that is from quran so the quran is preserved.
jews believe in resurrection in daniel 12 2 and many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt .so we find here two paths good life and everlasting and bad life and everlasting
Thank you sir for your honesty. May Allah bless you and guide you and me. ameen
Hello i just came here i would like to say thank u to this doctor such wise words
Uncorrupted no errors no Contradictions this is the only book on the face of earth remains in its original form since 6 century.
She said no contradictions and no errors, she doesnt need yo paste here the whole quran.
I suggest you study the quran and would find there are no contradictions in the quran.
If you find any please do forward your proof.
And that fact that there is only quran should stand out on its own.
And if you would check out the earliest quran, it is the same as we have today.
And please note that the quran was not written, it was revealed in speech, oral.
Side note, just of the bible you have different 65+ version.
No errors? How about all the scientific nonsense in the quran?
@@menknurlan I don't know who told you this my brother, at the contrary there are many facts that science has explained in the Quran
About the Sinai text. The under writing is completely different to the accepted modern version of the Qur'an. and he said Available text where is this available text is it copied online with translations?
It's not "sinai." Second, this "guy" is a qualified scholar and specialist in Quranic studies. Third, it is only *some* scholars who've claimed that the undertext is "different." Prof Sadighi has disproved this false assertion in hi massive essays (Der Islam). Generally, scholars now acknowledge that save for some tiny variants (the sort already mentioned in Islamic traditions), the undertext is basically the same as we have it now. None of the tiny variants effect meanings of passages.
"Surely, We have revealed the 'Zhikr' (Quran), and surely, We will preserve it" 15:9
“No falsehood will come to it, in the present or in the future; a revelation from One who is Wise and Praiseworthy.” 41:42
@imu70 hahaha if Allah wished to preserve the earlier book then the last prophet will never came and even Jesus Christ.But in Quran there are 25 prophets name only.I agree with 124000 prophets but they didn't came with 124000 books.By the way ,Quran doesn't changed a little bit.A page Quran was found in a London university which has same sura rahman as it now and it was 1400 year ago.Exactly Same😌😌 Watch this:ruclips.net/video/jowQond7_UE/видео.html
@imu70 There were 124,000 prophets. Of them, 315 were messengers. Prophets received Wahiy(Divine Revelation), though were not required to preach it. Messengers were prophets sent to a people to convey the message...
`Abdullah b. `Umar reportedly said, 'Let none of you say, "I have got the whole of the Qur'an." How does he know what all of it is? MUCH OF THE QUR'AN HAS GONE. Let him say instead, "I have got what has survived."' (Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. Abi Bakr al Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `ulum al-Qur'an, Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, Volume 2, p. 25)
-
Said Abu ‘Ubaid:
Isma’il b. Ibrahim related to us from Ayyub from Nafi‘ from Ibn ‘Umar who said - Let none of you say, “I have learned the whole of the Koran,” for how does he know what the whole of it is, WHEN MUCH OF IT HAS DISAPPEARED? Let him rather say, “I have learned what is extant thereof.” (Ibn Warraq, Origins of the Koran -
----
Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayub from Naf’ee from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Verily among you people one would say that he has found the Quran whilst he is unaware of what the total quantity of the Quran was, because most of the Quran has been lost. Rather one should say that verily he has found the Quran that has appeared.’
That hilarious moment when a non-muslims trying to explain the authenticity of the Holy Quran to the Muslims when their own "book of God" have 100 contradictions to begin with.
@@terrorizer77 which version is with Allah in heaven ?
1, Qaloon Qur'an
2, Al- susi(ibn-katheer) Qur'an
3,Khaled QUR'AN
4,Idrees QUR'AN
5,warsh Qur'an
6, Hafs Ad- Dury (Abu - Amro alBasri) QUR'AN
7,Al- Laith QUR'AN
8,Al- Bazzi Qur'an
9,Al- Azraq QUR'AN
10,As - Susi (Abu Amro alBasri) QUR'AN
11,Ad - Dury(alkisa'i) QUR'AN
12, Ibn shanboodh Qur'an
13,Al- Asbahaani QUR'AN
14,Hisham QUR'AN
15,Ibn Dhakwan QUR'AN
16,Isa BinWardan QUR'AN
17,Sulayman QUR'AN
18, Ibn Jammaz QUR'AN
19,Ahmad bin Farah QUR'AN
20,Qunbul Qur'an
21,Showba QUR'AN
22, Ruwais QUR'AN
23,Shujaa' bin Abi Nasr Al- Balakhi QUR'AN
24, Abu Amro Al -Ala QUR'AN
25,Hafs QUR'AN
26, Ruh QUR'AN
27, Al- Dury(Al Hasan AlBasri) QUR'AN
28, Hafs Al - Dury(ibn kathir) QUR'AN
29,khalf QUR'AN
30,Ishaq QUR'AN
31,Al Hasan bin Said Al- Matuu'l QUR'AN
32, Abu- Farah Al- Shan - budhi QUR'AN
LOVE AND RESPECT FROM LONDON
I hve been wondering for sometimes and I realised that those non muslims who try to discredit the authencity of God's kalam should study with the Islamic scholars who know Quranic language.
Jaw breaking, succinct and beautiful explanation. It is mostly evangelical cristains, out of desperation making this up, pretending that they discovered something new. Quranic qirat or modes of recitation is well preserved from the time of Prophet (pbuh).
`Abdullah b. `Umar reportedly said, 'Let none of you say, "I have got the whole of the Qur'an." How does he know what all of it is? MUCH OF THE QUR'AN HAS GONE. Let him say instead, "I have got what has survived."' (Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. Abi Bakr al Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `ulum al-Qur'an, Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, Volume 2, p. 25)
-
Said Abu ‘Ubaid:
Isma’il b. Ibrahim related to us from Ayyub from Nafi‘ from Ibn ‘Umar who said - Let none of you say, “I have learned the whole of the Koran,” for how does he know what the whole of it is, WHEN MUCH OF IT HAS DISAPPEARED? Let him rather say, “I have learned what is extant thereof.” (Ibn Warraq, Origins of the Koran -
----
Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayub from Naf’ee from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Verily among you people one would say that he has found the Quran whilst he is unaware of what the total quantity of the Quran was, because most of the Quran has been lost. Rather one should say that verily he has found the Quran that has appeared.’
@@SheikhAlladeen do you know are you quoting, you though that is hadith ? Better to aware your unauthenticity of new testament, that already crystal clear
What about Topkapi manuscript? 🤔🤔
You spoke about the text that was erased from Sanaa manuscript, what about the text that is now apparent in the Sanaa manuscript? Both attest that you couldn't be more wrong!!!
Lol this an old video Dan brubaker ripped this myth apart check his yt channel variant Quran and jay smith and Bernie power with qiraat
That is funny
This giy have been refuted long time ago
Where have u been my friend 🙄
ruclips.net/video/B0GGbZeGQOw/видео.html
If u responded to these
I will be a christian right now
And remember
Fear of searching for the truth
Is better that being comfortable with falsehood
Death outside jerusalem
ruclips.net/video/-lHLBEzO-fY/видео.html
? Is jesus the father
ruclips.net/video/amMlwZDeS4U/видео.html
? Was the crucifiction a historcal fact
ruclips.net/video/md2T3vlQq4I/видео.html
? Did the bible refute the crucifiction
ruclips.net/video/mvdgfoWEuL8/видео.html
And if u told me what about tbe quran
I will just gonna give u these videos to proof to u that this book is from god
How the quran was protected by god
Word for word
ruclips.net/video/WL2hDhkYoao/видео.html
Refutation of the varient readings of the quran
ruclips.net/video/x70F_1VXXOw/видео.html
The miraciolous compilation of the quran word for word
muslimgirl.com/compilation-of-the-holy-quran/
The ring structure of the quran
ruclips.net/video/yYY1BGKrr1E/видео.html
Prophets between quran and the bible
ruclips.net/video/lEc_ilaHim8/видео.html
@@sunnianonymous4416 ruclips.net/video/lH6M-iLVcKM/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/ANo6dXc2i-0/видео.html
Even according to the ahadith, some verses were gone and some verses were memorized by only few people died in the battle. The idea that the Quran we have now is the same Quran word by word since the days of Muhammad is laughable.
Peace and blessings of Allah be upon prophet Muhammad
If I would like a long-form lecture on what we know and understand of the forming of the Qur'an, where should I go? For this, offered here, but more comprehensive.
In which journal was that research using IR photography published?
These are all lies. Qur'an is nothing but musings of a middle aged war mongerer. Not to mention a p@éd0ph1le
@@zayedkhan9872 I would really want to read that source, but I know that it doesnt exist. These dude will say anything to support their "cultish" ideology.
@@grimandipace4822 exactly! And the worst thing is that if any muslim try to leave this cult, they literally kill him. I had to literally change countries when I wanted to leave this religion. Even then people came looking for me and I had to change cities. They don't care if they get caught after killing someone. Because killing an apostle is a one way ticket to "Jannah"
@@zayedkhan9872 You're a lunatic living in a fantasy of your own creation. Which city did this supposedly happen in?
Quran originality guaranteed by Allah. Aminn
I guarantee also Quran is from shaytan
It is ‘for the most part’ accurate. #1
The sana’a is not a complete quran. #2
The sana’a differs on many parts with the other oldest documents. #3.
He never says the quran was perfectly preserved.
Altakulic in Turkey did many comparisons between these oldest manuscripts. He confirms these are nit the same.
Funny how muslims then hang on to the perfect oral tradition, while allah says he wrote a book he sent down. He even made the pen first to write the book. And Abu Bakr and Uthman hurry to write things down as they fear parts may get lost. And several hadiths testify that a whole chapter got lost!
Shabir Ali and Yasir Qadhi now admit there are differences. Finally we get somewhere.
Great appreciation for this man❤
Quite true, but there are differences and not about pronunciation.
Mash Allah may Allah bless this man I believe in what he says and has given me more confidence in my belief regardless of the negative comments these people can’t handle the truth but love their lies so their are expecting to hear more lies so they can think to them selfs they have a reason not to accept the truth they dnt realise their lies dnt make god any less of a god god is always got despite all the lies they make they’ll come to know in the hear after Anyway we Muslims need more voices like this that can be heard to remove the doubts from the Christians and the rest of minds of our fellow Human beings. May Allah accept this scholars efforts and reward him inshallah
Uthman Samarkand Kufic Quran, was thought to be the oldest copies of the Quran in existence. The date the manuscript was written varies widely . However, most researchers agree that it was most likely written in the 8th or 9th century.
This manuscript is revered by the Muslim community as it is believed to be part of a group of Qurans commissioned by the third caliph Uthman in 651 AD. Uthman wanted to produce a standard copy of the Quran 19 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. This belief has been challenged by research that shows the manuscript came long after the 7th century.Also like the Samarkand Quran, the Topkapi manuscript is believed to be an original Quran commissioned by the third caliph Uthman in 651. Research has shown that this is not true and that the manuscript is over a century younger than Uthman’s Qurans.
If Quran was rev. in 7 ahruf why did Uthman write only one in qurayshi dialect he send out 9 copies in quraishi not different ahruf ? Where do the different ahruf come from today ?
We know of over 30 different arabic Quran today . For expl. warsh and hafs have about 30 different ayaat, different words and meanings.
How can Muslims still say Quran was preserved letter by letter word for word `? Which Copy (harf) is in heaven with Allah ? Today we mostly use Cairo edition 1924 in modern Arabic which has nothing to do with Uthman Quran
@BIG e scientific researchers with Phd's are the ones that find out the truth not some ppl that only want to believe in fairy tales.
www.oldest.org/religion/qurans/ We live in the time of information if you even want to know but I understand it hurts a Muslim a lot to admit Islam mambo jumbo is fake
You see Muslims weeping after trying to refute CP
@greenlight pls debunk if you can
@greenlight different ahruf or variants of the Quran are not mentioned in the Quran
Umar and Hisham belonged to the same tribe (the Quraysh), and members of the same tribe and would not have used different pronunciation.
the seven readings of the Qira'at were noted by Abu Bakr Ibn Mujāhid and canonized in the 8th century CE
going back to the time of Muḥammad, it is clear that multiple readings of the Qurʾān existed, and that some felt Ibn Masʿūd’s version to be more complete, correct, and authentic, and they supported his refusal to have his copy destroyed during the promulgation of the ʿUthmānic codex. Ibn Masʿūd’s and Ubayy’s codices differed not only in the order of the surahs, but also in content, with the former omitting Q 1, 113, and 114, and the latter including two additional short prayer-like surahs similar to these three based on legal and ḥadīth literature, the two surahs absent from the ʿUthmānic codex remained part of the oral, ritual canon
@greenlight you should learn the terms !!! What are FULLY QURANS ? How old are you 14 ? There is not even a Mushaf al-Uthmani to compare all the different Quran riwaya today.
“Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayub from Naf’i from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Verily among you people one would say that he has found the Quran while he is unaware of what the total quantity of the Quran was, because most of the Quran has been lost. Rather one should say that verily he has found the Quran that has appeared.’” (Fadhail al-Quran, by Qasim bin Salam (d. 222 A.H.), Volume 2, p. 135)
Quran cannot be changed or in error because its been memorized by alHafiizs and millions of Muslims since 1400 years before..therefore its been preserved and will be preserved till the end of the world..its one of Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W)'s miracles..
imu70 you dumb idiot Uthman just standardised writing to prevent different dialect speakers changing the words you damn fool. Why don’t you actually learn Arabic first instead of speaking about something that you are totally ignorant.
@@senadmusic8879 Well, the vowels did not exists at the time of Muhammad. The father of Arabic grammar Abu Amr ibn al-Ala
was born 150 years after Muhammad's death. It was he who inserted the vowels into the Koran.
@@keyurpatel1982 this is for those outside quraish people to know how to read arabic in quraish dialect, because we should read Quran in what it was revealed, unlike hebrew bibe you can recite your own dialect
@@izharcohen4572 Nowhere does the Koranb mention that it is in the Quresh dialect. The Koran says it is in the "clear Arabic tongue". The following are the different versions of the KOran : AbdulBaset AbdulSamad Mujawwad
AbdulBaset AbdulSamad Murattal
Abdur-Rahman as-Sudais
Abu Bakr al-Shatri
Hani ar-Rifai
Mahmoud Khalil Al-Husary
Mahmoud Khalil Al-Husary Muallim
Mishari Rashid al-`Afasy
Mohamed Siddiq al-Minshawi Mujawwad
Mohamed Siddiq al-Minshawi Murattal
Sa`ud ash-Shuraym
Mohamed al-Tablawi
@@keyurpatel1982 clear arabic tongue means quraish dialect, because at the time arabic only spoken in paran not in egypt not iraq, palestine etc
قال الله تعالى في سورة القيامة،ان علينا جمعه، و قرءانه.
According to Quran riwaya of Hafs 2:184 how many poor people must you feed after missing a fast? Answer: 1. According to Warsh 2:184 how many poor people must you feed after missing a fast? Answer 3 or more. Those who read Hafs are only feeding 1. Therefore, they will not be forgiven Hafs mushaf has deceived them into feeding only one or maybe Warsh is right .Can you tell me ?
Sir, I've seen critics say that the underlying writing from the Sana manuscript varied greatly from the actual text written on top of it. Is this not true?
No watch vedio by Yasir Qadhi
@@roxanne2749 My issue is, if there are variants, where is the perfect preservation. Variant simply means, change. Not perfect
@@innocentodinkemere4597 There is seriously no change at all this is just ur assumption. Almosy it's a unanimous consensus among all major historians including ppI Iike Bart Ehrman that the Quran has been preserved. And the manuscripts which ppI quote sometimes in order to prove that the Q has noy been preserved can't even read the text properly and even Arabs can't read those manuscripts as it's very ancient style of writing arabic. But it's a well known facr that ut has been preserved.
@@roxanne2749 Bart Rhrman is not really an authority on this point. He is not a Quranic scholar. Basically no one understands the manuscripts enough to know if variants exist but unanimously agree variants do not exist because they said so
@@innocentodinkemere4597 Who said “no one understands" l can read that as l am studying Qiraat from the age of 5 and l am just an Afghanistani Pashtoon girl who beIongs from a tribe which study lsIam, grammar, philosophy and subjects like that. And scholars like Siyooti have daid this as well. And most of the Quran Scholars know this as well
The mathematical miracles of the Quran *has already proven how preserved it is*
There’s no denying anymore about the Quran’s absolute preservation, *it’s only Christians and other nonbelievers that are jealous and angry, they are now scrapping the bottom of the barrel at this point.*
Too bad nothing will come of it.
Alhamdulillah for the true blessings of Islam.
Henry Santiago we’re in no competition with Jesus pbuh, we believe in him as much as you do. We just don’t think he’s “god” ...
The Prophet pbuh was sent for the whole of mankind while Jesus said himself that he was sent to save lost house of Israel,
The miracles were not only great but numerous. There are literally *THOUSANDS* of prophetic miracles that are recorded in Hadiths, splitting of the moon, healing the blind, the pebbles and trees talking, the water miracles, the instant rain etc... there are literally *THOUSANDS* m.ruclips.net/video/s6P90lMdtGs/видео.html... we Muslims just don’t put enough emphasis on it since we know all miracles come from Allah (God)
but the *greatest miracle* which anyone at anytime can see with their *own eyes* is the Holy Quran. It’s present *TODAY* and it isn’t just mere stories, you can see it, live it, breath it.
*That’s the difference*
Hate to break it to you but Jesus pbuh never wrote any of the gospels you have today. Matthew Mark Luke and John were written by 4 anonymous men who were not authorised by Jesus pbuh himself and never met nor knew Jesus pbuh in real life. They wrote down eyewitness accounts from people who also are anonymous and unverified. The Quran was sent to correct the misunderstandings you have in Christianity today. That Jesus pbuh was Son of God and God etc. To prove whether its from God you test it. If its not convincing to you then that's fine you can move on. But let's not sit and claim that the Bible is God's word when the changes are so obvious. Matthew and Luke copied from Mark who copied from the Q document which doesn't even exist today. That's a problem that the Quran doesn't have.
Wrong.
What about the missing verses, of Aisha, and the fighters at the battle of Yamama. They are lost and not included in the Koran. Mohammed gave out different versions of the same Surah to different people. How is that recorded in the Koran? Answer, it isn't. He simply made it up.
The Koran has errors in it. There are even edits in the Korans written 100 years after Mohammed died. Even Mecca is not mentioned.
No, the Koran is not the word of God, but the word of a man.
@@cassandrabritannia7852
You are lying to yourself and you know it
@@subzero3056 I am not lying but simply stating verifiable facts.
The real problem is that scholars are in denial, and the clerics.
You can think for yourself and look at the facts.
Here are some links for you to examine facts, not opinions.
01 THE QUR'AN HAS 4 CLAIMS, YET 6 PROBLEMS
ruclips.net/video/7GrGy-9-fQ4/видео.html
02-NOT ONE 7th c. QUR'AN COMPLETE & UNCHANGED
ruclips.net/video/ISBbqP52SoM/видео.html
03-TWO QUR'ANS WITHIN THE FIRST 20 YEARS?!
ruclips.net/video/5gAfWWxAOR0/видео.html
04-THE TOPKAPI HAS 2,270 DIFFERENT VERSES!
ruclips.net/video/nZpq_yD8vmc/видео.html
05-ALL EARLY QUR'ANS ARE MAN-MADE & CHANGED
ruclips.net/video/lXzWzhVKXjM/видео.html
06-THE BIGGEST PROBLEM? CHANGING THE WORDS!
ruclips.net/video/GsmIwWLaKhc/видео.html
07-THE SANA'A PALIMPSEST SHOWS AN EVOLVED QUR'AN
ruclips.net/video/zfhfa8T2VR0/видео.html
08-CARBON DATING PROVES THE QUR'AN IS TOO OLD
ruclips.net/video/3NVgZh_6HKs/видео.html
09-WE HAVE 31 DIFFERENT ARABIC QUR'ANS!
ruclips.net/video/7t8FGWic8UI/видео.html
10-THE QUR'AN IS 94...NO WAIT, ONLY 33 YEARS OLD!
ruclips.net/video/hGsMAOevrWg/видео.html
May Allah (swt) guide u sir
He is a Muslim.
Consistent copying does not prove the divinity of the religion, the leap of faith is still there. But I'm sure that being preached to, while sitting in the choir, is comforting. As Christopher Hitchens mentioned, you still have all of your work ahead of you. And you're still holding an empty bag.
I just like listening to his voice again. I miss him, I miss my old life.:) I feel like odysseus at the end of his travels , and having to fight the suitors..:)
Allah promised that the holy Qur an will be preserved and protected.
@imu70 you can search about it,to find a good answer.
@imu70 even uthman and the people of the world against it remember we already memorize the qur an from period to period and that is one way of preserving it that Allah promised amd wonder why we perfectly memorized it,its one of the meracle of the qur an and even you could easily memorize it if you wanna try to,and do you memorize your bible,of course you cant.and one thing is bible was never preserved in its original text which is an Aramaic.
Yes. That's what Muslims wrote in their Quran
Quran mainly preserved by memorization of thousands muslims generation to genertion, which today at least millions of us memorized it cover to cover. Writen form of Quran is just secondary way of preservation of Quran so if the entire book of Quran is gone, we muslim will be able to bring it back within days, without missing any dot of it, just from our memories.
Wrong. How tips.
There are known to be missing verses from the Koran. So no amount of reciters will bring those back. Or how about that Mohammed gave out different versions of the same Surah to different people.
How about the edits made to Korans after Mohammed and even Uthman died? There are many known edits.
It is wrong to say that the Koran is perfect and complete when clearly it is not.
what>>>????? I think that the Sana texts (the one in the background) is the real writing,,,and not the Utman version..
There is no uthman version he just gathered all the scriptures in one book
Have you read the Sanaa manuscripts? Have you actually write them learn to read the kufact writing and read some they're almost the same as the president Continental text of the quran, the variance are incredibly minor.there's absolutely no way of you saying that they were the original ones in any case but they all align with you QCT, the quranic consonantal text, the al-Rasm. And a minor variance likely just represent a slightly different transmission since Muslim scholarship for over 1,400 years have accepted the idea that the Quran was 7 ahruf, or modes. Seven which are still commonly recited and printed today in different regions, as an additional 3 that were considered canonical, and just represent dialectical variations because it's well known and well accepted to the crime which revealed in multiple dialects of the arabs, and which certain words has subtle vowel differences are slightly different spellings, that's really all that is amounted to. Tge subtle and slight differences in the Sana texts are likely either non standard variant qirats or scribal errors. Remember before printing presses scribal errors in text were all over the place, and the norm so the text will be checked after they were written against a memorizer and another established text and text that had errors would just be burnt or be put in the holdings of the scriptorium in question.. sometimes the parchment would be reused, and oftentimes it would just pile up for centuries. The same thing happens with Jewish scriptures extremely similar practices that's where the Cairo geniza comes from.
@@rightpath4346 and I call that "gathered, censored, and manipulated' book as Usman/Utman Version!
@@hommedetowne4253 All of the Muslims Scholars says that "nothing had change and the variance is very subtle" --are all of you listening to your own reasoning? - Please don't lie to yourselves, because if you do, -it would be the biggest and only achievement that you will have in your lifetime...
@@balantagi7187 what you said is a nonsensical rhetorical word salad. Trying to score debate points but not making a substantial point. There are non-Muslim scholars, users also non-muslim scholars, who have examined these texts who also indicate that there are no substantial variants from the standard quran's Continental text, the textual variance in them are minor, and these are a few fragments of text pages found in a scriptorium, written by hand, in an age before printing presses. All handwritten texts may contain small errors this includes copies of the quran. This is why the Quran as the very word itself describes from an Arabic root qra meaning to recite, is primarily a recital, and this one is primarily preserved massively through memory, at the time, then as well as now it was massively committed to memory tradition and transmission of the memorized text coincides with the transmission of the written text by scribes and the written text has traditionally always been checked against memorizers, not vice versa multiple memorizers and Inspire that it's not unusual for a small Scrabble error to slip through anyway. and such texts are usually, when a Scrabble error is discovered, amend it by hand are simply consigned to the holdings of a scriptorium to be destroyed by means consonant with sacred law, burning. this is the Muslim tradition and it's also the Jewish tradition, they have similar scriptoriums in Yemen and elsewhere in the Arabian peninsula for similar tasks.
Everyone who studies paleography knows and understands how the process of dealing with Scribal errors works. They are individual and unique to the text and question. So too, being this, also exist well documented variant readings on the Quran they have been accepted for over 1, 400 years as part of the broader Revelation of the Quran, for it was revealed with variant readings that go to the prophet himself. the quran's claim is that is preserved, this is the claim of the muslims, the fact in existence of continually transmitted, first by memorization in mass, and secondly on a secondary level by scribsl manuscript and codex production, as well as tested I'll start critics of the tradition just try to make the rhetorical points around this due to And extremely low level of knowledge on the quran. It has always from the very beginning to acknowledge if they are variant ways to read specific verses in the text, an individual companions of the Prophet transmit it individual greetings that they learned from him. And all the readings are considered to violently revealed preserved, well there are seven mainstream readings, with an additional three they're accepted as canonical and which the variance are mainly matter so subtle differences in vowel spelling, and in some cases the supposed variant readings are actually identical to others but just transmit it through another individual and thus considered to be another chain of transmission, another transmission tradition and hence an independent freestanding qirat named after the muqri who transmitted, these things have for long been completely acknowledged, and admit it, and accepted by knowledgeable Muslims.
The claim of Muslims in the Quran is preserved still applies here because all of these things are preserved. as far as the continually transmitted textual traditional if some random person, some random scribe, writes down text that has variance outside of the tradition by accident, because scribal slips of pin do exist, realize is it, puts it in the closet for later burning, and accidentally doesn't get around to it. Which happens all the time this is a well-known phenomenon in Jewish scriptorians as well as the Muslim scriptorians, I wish cases sometimes piles a text their intended to be burned as either worn out and no longer productive, are full of errors By an accidental scribal mistake pile up, or forgotten, I stumbled across by mistake A thousand years later. It's something like that happens how does it possibly remotely invalidate the Muslimb position? It doesn't unless you scrubber a need to superhuman accuracy the fact is all of the readings they're memorized by road, word for word, file for valve, punctuation stopping or accent Point by punctuating stopping and accent point, I literally millions of Muslims today, correspond with the readings that were memorized by the predecessors over a thousand years ago, and in both cases they correspond with what is written in the code axis, the books. But the physical written book has always been secondary because the Quran buys very name means a recital and the Muslim tradition has always been and this is well documented, that is preservation and transmission was primarily one of memory affirmed by handwritten text the existence of a few pages that, take the worst case claim this made, if it's claim that they have a few substantial lead different variants, different word order, radically different spelling of one or two words or something like that, assuming that claim has any basis in it, that will still just mean that a few random pages out of the book with literally hundreds of pages with no provenance, found in a scriptorium closet I have no weight...
The point of this video though is that it does even amount to that, is literally people for several years who haven't examined the texts in question to any depth, making up stuff the basis of a very superficial surface analysis.
Respond to the specific claims made in this video don't wave your hand to make some sort of cheap rhetorical points but Muslims needing to not lie to themselves and blah blah blah stay on point, focus, just like you had to do in elementary school.
So without exactly examining the specific manuscripts in great detail it's hard to know if there are actually variants that aren't actually part of the transmission and are not attributed to simple scribal mistakes or simple matters of old orthography in which they perhaps really are not even different readings or errors, but simply the orthography it's just a bit different from current norms. The evolution of the current contemporary Arabic script is still poorly understood even by experts there are still aspects of older Arabic orthography they're not well understood my present day academia,, Ahmad Al Jallad et al even for example recently published a paper in the field the demonstrate the existence of a new Arabic letter form, a type of ligature not previously been known, found in other texts, so there's a high burden here that needs to be met before simply making irresponsible claims. No one was bothering to do this, everyone was just irresponsibly claiming the absolute worst case possible conclusion..
However people like you don't bother examining the texts you just rather assume the worst case scenario out of sheer bias and then you'll wave your hands and make some sort of rhetorical point about Muslims not lying to themselves. Even for critical non-muslim orientalist scholars there is much debate on these texts and others, and the questions that revisionist scholars who are hostile to the tradition want to assert are by no means settled even by non-muslim academic experts, and I really doubt that you are versed in the current status of academic crime studies in any case, the range of debate, in the later scholarship on these texts from Yemen. So before opening your mouth in a public forum perhaps you should actually acquaint yourself with the full range of the scholarship, not just cherry picking fun it that which you want to focus on from sources hostile to Islam and the Quran and its textual tradition but rather actually having some intellectual integrity and looking at the whole of it.
These manuscripts from this yemeni scriptorium in Sanaa increasingly really appear to be much Ado about nothing from the very beginning. All the people out there who made a big deal all of them and somehow proving that the tradition is wrong are really guilty of massive intellectual dishonesty, plainly put that's just how it is
ahruf and qiraat ignored?
those were there since the beginning
Never in doubt anyway.
Quran will never be corrupted they have tried but fail may Allah protect us from evil
@imu70 so??? Quran was memorized by 900 companions bro...
LORD WILL UPLIFT YOUR STATUS brother ameen
Thank you .
Look when it comes to Islam I can disagree with a lot of things but when it comes to preservation I have to say its authentic. The reason being that when I studied the most famous 7/ 10 Qiraat or variants, and me having a diploma in classical Arabic i noticed the essence and main message was always the same. The words used in the variants had very small changes. An example in the english language could be that of the word used for a sport. So in USA they call it soccer, while in other parts they call it football. The same way in the Qur'an depending on which part of the Arab continent we find small variants. Now that was my study of the 7/ 10 famous Qiraat / variants.
If someone is to study all the variants side by side as we did in one of my classical Arabic courses that by the way was taught by a non-Muslim you will find that the diffrences are only in pronunciation and a little in words. The essence of the meaning is intact.
As for all the historical claims in the books of hadith that some caliph is burning versions and so many versions and so on. All we need to do is read the Qur'an itself and as the Qur'an says that it was written on noble scribes. Read below. So the Qur'an itself clarifies the claims in the Hadith. Hope this helps.
No, indeed! It is a reminder So whoso wills might remember it In honoured writings Exalted, purified By the hands of scribes Noble, virtuous. (80:11-16)
You learn classical arabic..so what the different among torah and bible?what al quran have while others doesnt?
The father of Arabic grammar Abu Amr ibn al-Ala
was born 70 years after the Hijra. What classical Arabic are you talking about ? It was he who inserted vowels into the Koran.
@@keyurpatel1982 well I'm talking about the classical Arabic which is without the vowels. We studied poetry. Did a deep dive into diffrent dialects like the Quraishi dialect. And researched and broke down the way that they spoke. How the language has evolved. Etc.
@@keyurpatel1982 also we did study vowels and stuff cause that is what builds the foundation but i learned that stuff long before my schooling days as a child.
@@JJ-xo3bc How can you write anything without vowels ? You cannot even write the Arabic alphabet without vowels . You can even write the 26 letters of the Alphabet without vowels. There was no classical Arabic i Muhammd's time. The 26 letters of the Arabic would not exist without vowels. I am absolutely amazed as to how do you write a book without vowels, in any language. Muhammad himself was illiterate.
I believe Dr. Lumbard was a student of the great Prof. Seyyed Hossein Nasr.
+sam7748 HE IS A MUSLIM WHO HAS JUST DONE TAQIIYA!!
yes. lumbard was
It is no use using carbon dating a manuscript as the vellum starts to decay as soon as the animal is killed, also such vellums were kept and written on & used years later. So using carbon dating is not at all accurate in dating a manuscript, it is accurate in showing when the animal died but not when it was used to write texts. To date a manuscript accurately, the most accurate way is to look at the script & the way it was written in terms of the sentence structure, phraseology, inclusion of diacritical marks etc.
Yasir Qhadi says that the standard narrative has holes.
Dr. Joseph Lumbard, I would like to congratulte you for the interview, it was explicit.
@@SheikhAlladeen Christian prince?, the same guy who thought paul was an islamic prophet? Lol
@@imamspongebob2812 Umar was once looking for the text of a specific verse of the Qur’an he vaguely remembered. To his deep sorrow, he discovered that the only person who had any record of that verse had been killed in the battle of Yamama and that the verse was consequently lost. (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p. 10 - see also as-Suyuti’s al-Itqan fi ‘ulum al-Quran, volume 1, p. 204)
“Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayub from Naf’i from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Verily among you people one would say that he has found the Quran while he is unaware of what the total quantity of the Quran was, because most of the Quran has been lost. Rather one should say that verily he has found the Quran that has appeared.’” (Fadhail al-Quran, by Qasim bin Salam (d. 222 A.H.), Volume 2, p. 135) watch CP and see Mumins cry when they see the truth
@@SheikhAlladeen bro how could u give cp any credibility?
@@imamspongebob2812 he talks to native Arab speakers almost always and he does use and he reads in Arabic from islamic websites a native speaker would call him out right away
@@SheikhAlladeen watch farid responds, he is also great at arabic... he took ulumul qurab courses and he exposed 107 lies of cp and cp only replied to 2 and he couldnt even refute those 2 ...... he was such a coward he made a vid called "debate with old farid 2017", it was a fake debate that never happened.. he did to fool is gullible Indonesian fans
You're saying all this just to save your job...No matter how long you suppress the truth, the truth will forever prevail. Stop this and say the truth...!!!
so give us the truth then with proof. Thx
@@liby254 Compare the 37 different arabic Qurans and you'd see that it has not been perfectly preserved. They even said it in their own interview, Yasir Qadhi vs Muhammad Hijab...They later deleted the video from their RUclips channel but you'd get it from pfounder films...
@@EkowBigNuts shuga, can I ask, which religion are you from?
@@EkowBigNuts Also 37 qurans, can you show me how these 37 different qurans look. like show me some type of proof of these 37 different qurans. (And please link me to a researcher, not David Wood Jay smith etc). B/c
okay what about The stoning and breastfeeding verses? Aisha is reported in Buhary, Muslim and ibn Maja that the manuscript that contained the Quranic verse about stoning and breastfeeding men has been eaten by her sheep. Aisha also narrated that 2/3 of Surah 33 were lost. Abu Musa al Ashari claimed that a sura that was as long as Sura Bara‘at was lost. Do you declare the noble Sahabas to be liars?
Nonsense
I wonder what he thinks of Daniel Brubaker's work now
@Ahmad Yusof Uthman Samarkand Kufic Quran, was thought to be the oldest copies of the Quran in existence. The date the manuscript was written varies widely . However, most researchers agree that it was most likely written in the 8th or 9th century.
This manuscript is revered by the Muslim community as it is believed to be part of a group of Qurans commissioned by the third caliph Uthman in 651 AD. Uthman wanted to produce a standard copy of the Quran 19 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. This belief has been challenged by research that shows the manuscript came long after the 7th century.Also like the Samarkand Quran, the Topkapi manuscript is believed to be an original Quran commissioned by the third caliph Uthman in 651. Research has shown that this is not true and that the manuscript is over a century younger than Uthman’s Qurans.
If Quran was rev. in 7 ahruf why did Uthman write only one in qurayshi dialect he send out 9 copies in quraishi not different ahruf ? Where do the different ahruf come from today ?
We know of over 30 different arabic Quran today . For expl. warsh and hafs have about 30 different ayaat, different words and meanings.
How can Muslims still say Quran was preserved letter by letter word for word `? Which Copy (harf) is in heaven with Allah ? Today we mostly use Cairo edition 1924 in modern Arabic which has nothing to do with Uthman Quran
@Ahmad Yusof birmingham manuscript 2 pages carbon dating done on material not the ink. A different word and meaning is not another teacher ist different words.
Paganino & Alessandro Paganini Issue the First Printed Edition of the Qur'an in Arabic, of Which One Copy Survived."The other factor that makes the Koran printed by Paganini intolerable is the huge number of errors. There is not a word without errors,' The 1538 Koran doesn't only contain errors that we might call orthographical (for example, a letter that should be written with three dots is written with two),- there are errors that amount to outright blasphemy, such as the omission of the name of God. *Allah will preserve the Quran from corruption. Stop this foolish nonsense
Why do you insult pll I never said Cairo hafs version was the first printed. When Abdools get angry reminds me of shaytan getting angry when we expose him
@@SheikhAlladeen the Quran was memorised and passed down orally, regardless of it written down or not, the Quran was always memorised my hundreds of thousands of people, hence if the writing in 1 or 2 qurans are wrong, it won't matter, because those Qurans would just be discarded as they don't replicate the memorised versions, that were memorised and attested to by hundreds of thousands and now millions of people around the world. If you really think that the Quran was and is only read via physical scripts, then you are delusional, the Quran has been memorised from the time of the Prophet (peace be upon Him), and till this day it has been preserved by memory in 100s of millions of people around the world, who have memorised the same Quran. Just because the printing has some errors, doesn't mean the actual words that were memorised have errors in people's brains. Because so many people have the Quran memorised, so if 1 person messes up somewhere, there would be thousands if not millions correcting them. It's the only book thats been memorised from front to back.
@@SheikhAlladeen you forget that the Quran was memorised, from the first time it was revealed to the Prophet (peace be upon Him) till this day
@@Anonymous-rz6vq “Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayub from Naf’i from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Verily among you people one would say that he has found the Quran while he is unaware of what the total quantity of the Quran was, because most of the Quran has been lost. Rather one should say that verily he has found the Quran that has appeared.’” (Fadhail al-Quran, by Qasim bin Salam (d. 222 A.H.), Volume 2, p. 135)
Umar was once looking for the text of a specific verse of the Qur’an he vaguely remembered. To his deep sorrow, he discovered that the only person who had any record of that verse had been killed in the battle of Yamama and that the verse was consequently lost. (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p. 10 - see also as-Suyuti’s al-Itqan fi ‘ulum al-Quran, volume 1, p. 204)
Where is the undeniable evidence he's talking about?
Well I’m not sure you would understand a 10 hour lecture on carbon dating and Islamic sciences of oral and written transmission. But I would a summary of the undeniable evidence goes as the following.
1. The current evidence from examined manuscripts during the time of the prophet lines up with the Muslim narrative of the history of the Quran.
2. The variations within differing Qurans have been accounted for via chains of transmissions, also known within what we now call the Qiraat of the Quran or modes of recitation.
3. The mass transmission of the text via oral documented accounts from hundreds of their companions and so on till today, with current memorisers having documented chains going back to the prophet himself.
These are but a few, extremely condensed evidences.
Mohammad Rizwaan Where is the evidence of those evidences?
Where is the oldest manuscript? What does it date to? Carbon dating results are not that hard to understand, unless you have to explain the fact that the carbon dating doesn't match up with the traditional history of Islam.
How are chain of transmission accounts dating more than 150+ years later than the Quran authoritative? It makes no sense to me, that The entire authority of the Quran as being true, relies the testimony of "non-inspired authors" of the hadith written hundreds of years after the death of muhammad.
How do you know the Quran variations are accounted for? Who wrote them? Where do they come from? Who decided today's Quran is the best variation, and why? Have you seen the variations and compared the meanings of each word variation, it's not just pronunciation variations, there are word meaning variations. How do you explain that while claiming a perfect preservation of the Quran?
Watch 1300 year old Quran found in Birmingham UK.
Mash Allah may Allah bless this man. There are so many proofs now for the accuracy of the Glorias Quran
in the Kufi (al-Kufa) count the number is 6236
in the Makky (Mekka) count they are 6210
in the Basry (Basra) count 6214
in the count of a-Shaam (Damascus) 6226 how many ayaat on the Quran
@@SheikhAlladeen the word count is the same and the words are the same. The avatar ending was based on the narrator
@@IslamLearning I am showing proof you are just claiming by trying to explain . Why so much explaining in Islam and so little proof
@@SheikhAlladeen what you are saying is not a proof of anything. The ending of the ayats is different based on narrators but the words are the same. Nothing changing at all
@@IslamLearning nope different words that is the problem. Which Quran is like Mushaf al-Uthmani ?
ruclips.net/video/BwSkDXXpNSI/видео.html
Now Islamic scholar start to question the authencity/reluability of Sanaa manuscript and some said it was written by lay person to justify the differences between lower and upper layer of palimpsest. Carbon dating is also problematic as it do not give one date but range of time from 578 to 669 CE, furthermore it only predict the age of animal skin which may be many2 years before the texts were written. In other word Sanaa Manuscript cannot be used for pro or con arguement regarding preservation of quran. The questions remain unanswered whether the preservation did occur as:
1. Original mushaf kept by Hafsa was missing
2. Original Othmanic mushaf was missing
3. Othman burn the rest of quranic texts that he used as references to compile, therefore muslim after him wont be able to know what was the quran before him.
4. While compiling the quran, one of the most important companion of prophet who is also expert in quran ime Ibn Masood was not invited into the compilation team, that is strange.
Yes, quran was preserved partly by memorization but who can confirm that Huffaz pre Othmanic era memorized the same quran with post Othmanic era. Knowing that the main reason why Othman wanted to compile quran is because a significant different in the recitation discovered between grps of muslim from different locality. The concept of ahruf and qiraat are still not well understood even by Islamic scholar.
And now more and more muslim aware that Quran is not preserved word by word, dot by dot as what was previously believed.
Dude no not try to confuse us. Birmingham quran that predates uthman is still same as today
@@ciplk1767 Please do not give wrong information. Burmingham manuscript is not predated Othmanic mushaf. More so , it is not a complete manuscript, only small part of surah Al Kalf and Surah Taha out of 114 surah. Carbon dating predict it could be written as late as 645 CE (ranging 568-645 CE), long way after the death of Muhammad
@@ciplk1767 Burmingham manuscript only consist of small part of surah Al Kaft and Taha , less than 2 Surah out of 114 surah. Carbon dating predict age of animal skin of that manuscript between 568 - 645 CE, so it could be 645 CE which is more than 20 years after the death of prophet. Show us where is the complete Othmanic Mushaf or better if you have Mushaf kept by Hafsa (prophet wife, daughter of Umar).
@@nazhasan428 again it still before uthman which refuted your argument. You also said 20 year after death of muhammed when you said it can be also on 568. So dont ignore that the quran can also be from muhammeds time
@@ciplk1767 Doesnt matter before or after Othman because it only consist of less than 2 surah from 114 surah. How can you claim it is the same quran if 112 surah were missing?
In 1924 in Cairo they standardised the Quran.... this liar knows it
Alhamdoli’llaah for guided me to Islam.
Nobody would make up that story, except for the Umayyads, because guess what ? Their califate was disputed by descendants of Muhammad, so by linking the official codex to 'Uthman who was part of banu Umayya, it gave the Umayyad dynasty the religious credibility that they desperately needed by the time of 'Abd al Malik.
I would like to know who "THOSE PEOPLE" are that claim that the Quran was there before our Prophet (pbuh)..... and those people who say there are different versions of the Quran.
I do believe that - parts of Quran predate Muhammad, and there are a lot of Quran variants - and of course, I have arguments for that. And apropos, this " professor" lies shamelessly about Sanaa Manuscripts.
@@neluroman555 Well...could you provide some of the other Qurans please and those that predate the Prophet.
@@thinkdifferent4314 there are many other Qurans. One of them is Warsh Quran, but there are many more, believe me.
No one says that there is any Quran to predate the Prophet, we only say that some from the Quran stories predate the Quran . I refer here to the story of Dhul Quarnain , the story of The Seven Sleepers, the story of Solomon and the talking ant, or the story of Jesus giving life to a clay bird. All these stories are neither in Torah nor in Bible, but in the Christian and Jewish folklore ( Talmud). We can track all these stories back to the IV th or the V th century. Most probably Muhammad heard them during his wanderings through desert, from a caravan fire camp to other caravan fire camp. There is a hadith from where we learn that Muhammad loved the stories of old people and generally believed them being true. That is why his own tribe, who knew these stories too, accused him of lying when affirmed that such stories were divine and sent him and only him by Allah.
If I told you that Allah sent me the formula: E=mc2, what would you say?
Maybe something: " No, no, I too know this formula because 100 years ago a guy called Alfred Einstein invented it. "
That was the case with the Quraish tribe, as they heard from Muhammad stories that they too knew.
How could they believe in him? How?
The most probably they would have continued to not believe in Muhammad if he didn't come to them with and army to prove his claims.
@@neluroman555 these are not proofs.
@@neluroman555 their your opinion
The Preservation of Holy Quran
1-What is Quran ?
2-Where Quran was preserved before revelation onto Muhammad(s.a.w) ?
3-How Quran is revealed and preserved ?
4-what is the role of text scripture in Islamic tradition ?
1-What is Quran ?
This is the Book about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah -[2:2]
[This is] a Book revealed to you, [O Muhammad] - so let there not be in your breast distress therefrom - that you may warn thereby and as a reminder to the believers.[7:2]
Have the people been amazed that We revealed [revelation] to a man from among them, [saying], "Warn mankind and give good tidings to those who believe that they will have a [firm] precedence of honor with their Lord"? [But] the disbelievers say, "Indeed, this is an obvious magician." [10:2]
Alif, Lam, Meem, Ra. These are the verses of the Book; and what has been revealed to you from your Lord is the truth, but most of the people do not believe.[13:1]
2-Where Quran was preserved before revelation onto Muhammad(s.a.w) ?
But this is an honored Qur'an [85:21]
[Inscribed] in a Preserved Slate.[85:22]
Indeed, it is a noble Qur'an [56:77]
In a Register well-protected;[56:78]
None touch it except the purified.[56:79]
[It is] a revelation from the Lord of the worlds.[56:80]
3-How Quran is revealed and preserved ?
Say, "Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel - it is [none but] he who has brought the Qur'an down upon your heart, [O Muhammad], by permission of Allah, confirming that which was before it and as guidance and good tidings for the believers."[2:97]
Move not your tongue with it, [O Muhammad], to hasten with recitation of the Qur'an.[75:16]
Indeed, upon Us is its collection [in your heart] and [to make possible] its recitation.[75:17]
Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its guardian.[15:9]
NOTE:1- Quran has revealed on the Qalb(Rooh as the meaning taken ) not in the form of book and it is preserving by Allah(The GOD ).
2- Quran was memorised by the prophet Muhammad(s.a.w) and many thousands of Huffaz till today .
3-Quran is preserved in the heart of Knowledgible(Huffaz ) as quran says :
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.[29:49]
Remember : 1 .Quran is being read on daily basis as per Quran says In salah(namaz) as well as distinctly in Quran tilawah individually.
Recite, [O Muhammad], what has been revealed to you of the Book and establish prayer. Indeed, prayer prohibits immorality and wrongdoing, and the remembrance of Allah is greater. And Allah knows that which you do.[29:45]
Huffaz: Those who have memorised the entire Quran .
Annual revison [Quran]- Huffaz are in millions who revise the entire Quran In Ramdan .
NOTE: This Annual revision tradition is well known from the age of Prophet(s.a.w) till today .
Remember : Quran has been transmittted through the memory by the long chain of memorizer(Huffaz) in all generation .
Crosschecking statement from Quran : No contradiction as Quran says :
Then do they not reflect upon the Qur'an? If it had been from [any] other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction.[4:82]
Note : if we take 7 Qirat there is no contradiction and these Qirat are being recited in different countries .
REMARKABLE NOTE :
1.
Always A long chain of reciter (Huffaz) who memorised the entire Quran .
2.
Quran is being recited on the daily basis in Slah (namaz) and distictly from slah (namza) individually as well .
3.
Annual revison of Entire Quran in the month of Ramdan (well known tradition).
4.
No contradiction among 7 Qirat .
4-what is the role of text scripture in Islamic tradition ?
Note : a standard text was made in the period of utman(r.a) after the death of prophet around 16 year later .
2. Only a few copies around 5 was made in the presence of Huffaz and was verified by the memory of Huffaz (who have meomorised the Quran)
3.Around one centrury (100 years) after prophet death only few official copies was there.(there was an official group of huffaz underwhich Quranic text was written)
4. As per Islamic tradition in all genaration there was many thousands Huffaz .
Note : sciptual text was only for a backup .(No importance in accpetance of Quran)
Remark : Quran will only be accepted through the memory As Allah says in Quran.
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.[29:49]
Uthman Samarkand Kufic Quran, was thought to be the oldest copies of the Quran in existence. The date the manuscript was written varies widely . However, most researchers agree that it was most likely written in the 8th or 9th century.
This manuscript is revered by the Muslim community as it is believed to be part of a group of Qurans commissioned by the third caliph Uthman in 651 AD. Uthman wanted to produce a standard copy of the Quran 19 years after the death of the Prophet Muhammad. This belief has been challenged by research that shows the manuscript came long after the 7th century.Also like the Samarkand Quran, the Topkapi manuscript is believed to be an original Quran commissioned by the third caliph Uthman in 651. Research has shown that this is not true and that the manuscript is over a century younger than Uthman’s Qurans.
If Quran was rev. in 7 ahruf why did Uthman write only one in qurayshi dialect he send out 9 copies in quraishi not different ahruf ? Where do the different ahruf come from today ?
We know of over 30 different arabic Quran today . For expl. warsh and hafs have about 30 different ayaat, different words and meanings.
How can Muslims still say Quran was preserved letter by letter word for word `? Which Copy (harf) is in heaven with Allah ? Today we mostly use Cairo edition 1924 in modern Arabic which has nothing to do with Uthman Quran
Aisha said the vers of stoning and brestfeeding was eaten by a goat OK. But what about Muslim claim the Quran was memorized by Millions they were not eaten by goats .Why did that vers not make it into Quran if Quran was memorized ? Islam busted by american Internet
Tks to the micro films, we know that variants do exists.
This is a bull lie. 37 Quran and counting.
1)
this argument would hold some weight if Muslims actually believed that there were no variant Qur'anic readings.
unfortunately, Muslims from the earliest period acknowledged these variant readings and they were all considered valid if the chain could be traced back to Prophet Muhammad (may peace be upon him).
there have even been PhDs done in the West on this subject, so to show it off as if this is hidden by muslims is ignorant and dumb
2)
Quran having different qiraahs is a well-known fact.
Even Quran came in 7 huruf (dialects). In time of Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) it is standardised to just one. And even from that one we still get these variants
3)
When the Quran was being compiled by Uthmaan (may Allah be pleased with him) , there were multiple "versions" of the Quran.
But they were not different in content, only spelling of words, order of surahs, and synonyms.
There was a different "version" for each of the different Arabic dialects, but again the content itself was *exactly* the same. This is when Uthmaan (RA) decided to standardize the Quran and the written Arabic language as well.
So there has always been a single Quran from the beginning. Just in different translations (from dialect to dialect)
4)
more information about this subject here:
ruclips.net/video/W3npWgX_w50/видео.html
and here:
mobile.twitter.com/Farid_0v/status/1271181543365541889
stop regurgitating what people say
I’m glad someone replied. It’s coming out of the open and even your scholars are spilling the beans out. Lol. Yasir Khadi actually admitted it with his interview with `Mohammed `hijab. According to Yasir Khadi, Muslims like you are the one who’s regurgitating the words from your lying leaders, afraid to question it out of respect. Pathetic.
Allah did not preserve his words contrary to the promise he made to His pervert Prophet, he said he will not let the book be corrupted by men. Lol. Excuse me Allah?... 37 Qurans and counting.
ik for a fact you didn't actually bother to watch what yasir qadhi or mohammad hijab said in context and detail. you and the rest of the other fools took their words out context. yasir qadhi affirmed that the quran is preserved, and so did mohammad hijab.
furthermore, u didn't respond to a single point bc u know ur wrong
furthermore, the variations aren't a surprise for muslims at all, you fool. in africa there's people who mainly read warsh quran, and literally no muslim is shocked from this.
the variations have been known since the early times of islam. the prophet muhammad (may peace be upon him) himself said that the quran will be in 7 modes of recitation. the variation comes from the mixing of the modes, such and hafs and warsh. you obviously don't know about any of this, because you're ignorant in this field
on top of that, even non muslim orientalists agree that the quran goes 100% back to the prophet muhammad (may peace be upon him), an example of such orientalist is marijn van putten. (not like i take the orientalists as authoritative in the field of islam)
you are a sheep for making baseless statements bc of some 5 second clip from yasir qadhi.
furthermore, *even if yasir qadhi meant that, he didn't even go into detail or explained his view. are you so foolish that a 5 second clip with no sufficient explanation is enough for you*
either way, yasir qadhi DIDN'T SAY IT WASN'T PRESERVED, HE EVEN ADDRESSED THIS IN A FACEBOOK POST
furthermore, what ur saying is thoroughly refuted by this video:
ruclips.net/video/K11XfOfTFAU/видео.html
give up with arguing about what you don't know about
i m Oh I did watch it.. He said there’s a HOLeeeeeE in the narratives. Lol.
ill give you an exmaple
is the word fought and killed have same meaning??
Depends on what context. If they are used in context of war, you would expect fought and kill to have the same meaning effectively.
@@mohammadrizwaan1890 the problem is that it was in the same verse
tha hafs quran said many prophets fought
the warsh quran said many prophets are killed
which then is the unchanged word of Allah?
@@mohammadrizwaan1890 Even in the context of war how does fought and kill have the same meaning ? You are being ridiculous. I fought and I was taken a prisoner of war and was released because I had not killed anyone. How on earth do fought and kill here have the same meaning ? You must be nuts.
Fought and killed does not have the same meaning in english, however if you point out to me a text in arabic i can explain to you. Send me the verse or whatever it is you wondering about.
@@jaaaaaah The father of Arabic grammar was born 100 years after Muhammad's death. That should tell you as o the difference between ought and killed. Muhammad was completely illiterate The Koran was compiled by Zayd ibn Thabith and others. Zayb ibn Thabith admits to having made changes to the Koran.
Furquan
Sorry I have not quoted Dr. Joseph Lombard accurately. It should read "...The story which the Muslims have of the compilation of the Koran is for the most part accurate".
I would advise that you read the actual book written by the person who personally studied the Sanaa foiios (Asma Hilali).
I believe it is unwise for any person to form a stand based on things that are claimed by others, while not verifying the claims from the actual person who did the study (ie Asma Hiulali). He who did that is the one taking hearsay as an accepted evidence
The Bible contains a verse mentioning that Jesus (pbuh) was only sent to the Jews.
*I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel* (Matthew 15:24)
Other Prophets were also previously sent to other communities. Muhammad (pbuh) was taken as the last Prophet by the Muslims, of which through him the Quran was revealed. Muslims take the Quran as the final testament to mankind. Older revelations are not taken as the one designated to carry the final message.
Humans themselves change their laws throughout history. Because people eventually learn new things and formulate new laws as the community have different needs. The laws given to the previous Prophets were meant for the communities where they were sent to. However, God must decide at one point in time, of the final message, and that is where Quran comes in. And it only makes sense to preserve the final testament. So there is a logic behind the revelation of a final message and "phasing out" the older revelations or not preserving them.
*2v106* None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: Knowest thou not that Allah Hath power over all things?
However, it can also be strange for God to "neglect" older Message(s) sent to previous Prophets per se, which is why the Quran as a final testament acknowledged previous revelations. Not to mention the Jews and Christians are among the most prominent grp of believers, besides Muslims, the final testament did not say anything about their eventual fate? Not to mention nowadays there are also grps of ppl who can be generically termed as "believers"
There are various verses that can touch issues relating to the above, thus the Quran did touch on this and made an open statement in the verse below:
*2v62* _Surely those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last day and does good, they shall have their reward from their Lord, and there is no fear for them, nor shall they grieve_
The above could be interpreted in a number of ways and may lead to controversial interpretations, but it becomes a consistent fact when coupled with the explanation for the relevant verses below:
*48v14* _To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth: He forgives whom He wills, and He punishes whom He wills: but Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful_
God is the owner of everything ever existed or will exist: The above verse also mentioned that God have the power (prerogative right) to punish/forgive anyone (who have sinned), but it concludes with a statement that God is often more forgiving. The above norm coincided with humans own practise, ie the highest ruler of a country (a President/King/Queen) have the prerogative right to pardon any citizen that has been found guilty by the laws of that country. And usually a pardon is given by a ruler due to "merciful" reasons
We are here in this temporary place for a great number of reasons. Of course humans will make mistakes here and there, and thus the final testament declared that God is going to be the ultimate judge -- not the mullahs, imams, pastor, or any "religious" ppl.
The prerogative power of God rhymes with human conscience, and it is a logical fact that can easily be accepted by "people of the final nation".
*5v48* _To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to __thee.To__ each among you have we prescribed a law and an open way.If Allah had so willed, He would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given you: so strive as in a race in all virtues.The goal of you all is to __Allah.it__ is He that will show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute_
There are several reasons to believe the Quran is the same from the time shortly after Muhammads.
1. Muslims only have one Quran that by itself is evidence.
2. Islam spread very quickly to encompass Arabia Mesopotamia North Africa Southern Russian and Spain. if there were multiple Quran lots of variants should be turning up
3. The Quran when talking about current events (not retelling other judeo-christian stories) it only talks about Muhammad time. Never about the huge empire infighting amongst Muslims or about events predating Muhammad as if they are current. Instead they are clearly in the past.
4. In other history books when people quote or refer to verses in the Quran but never quote a verse that doesn't exist.
5. There are no other references to the Quran or an Arab prophet from other historical texts like the Romans or Persians predating the Quran.
6. The Quran itself is distinct and extremely consistent. Muslims and people with knowledge of Arabic can tell it from other saying of Muhammad speeches poetry from the same time period. It does not resemble any thing else in the Arabic language.
7. The Quran talks about places people and govt that exist at the same time as Muhammad.
Besides carbon dating and other thing there should be lots of circumstantial evidence if the story Muslim tell was off the mark.
He said "is for the most part accurate" well that going against what Muslims claim that the Qur'an has been "Perfectly" preserved from the time of Mohammed. is for the most part is the same as saying it hasn't been Perfectly preserved. also who is this chap Bayan Claremont and what are his qualifications ?
St. Apollonius I think you may have misheard. He said the 'story we have of the compilation of the quran is most part accurate'.
That wasn't a statement talking about the text of the quran.
+Drigger95
Some of these people look for anything to put the Quran/Islam in a bad light--but they always fail!
@Meshari I'm not sure what you mean I haven't mentioned anything about people going to Hell.. To me that judgement is reserved for God alone.
I don't think he has any qualifications.
The Quran is preserved. If there is a difference it’s due to the fact the Prophet’s companions spoke different variations of Arabic. So he let them use different words with the same meaning. Eg you will see one manuscript will have “the owner of the day of judgment .” And the other “the king of the day of judgement.”
So he says changes were made in the Quran
Well not many people know torah which in hebrew it doesnt have..dot,line,symbol,paragraph etc..just like al quran..since those revelation in sound languange or laws system help how to pronouce..its the same thing..thats not including bible..bcs in greek clearly not semetic languange..word or verse never change in al quran😉ruclips.net/video/nrlTo8WS9p8/видео.html most christian doesnt know..jesus speak aramic..mother of semetic language..ho..ho.
@Adi Sonara atleast make effort to learn revelation languange esp follow what jesus say to understand it better..if children of isreal and muslim..make effort revelation languange why most of you guys didnt even bother want to learn.
Abogration exist in bible Jesus used to say love enemies but after he said Christians should slay enemies of Jesus who deny him
Hahaha...
He's not being straight with us. "...the variations that exist..." He says that quickly, like we won't notice what he actually said before he's begun the rationalization.
There aren't supposed to be variations. It's supposed to be from Allah. The "under-text" as he calls it ... it's called a palimpsest. That means somebody erased the words that were on the page and wrote different words. Apparently he thinks it's all right to erase and change the words of the Quran.
Not only that, but the version he's talking about is missing several suras. Some of the them are not only different but quite a bit shorter. So, the Quran that exists today was not only changed, but some parts were not there in the first place.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
.
Muslims always knew there were variations in the early manuscripts, because we have traditions that tell us the early muslim rulers tried hard to destroy all fauly manuscripts
Zeupater Well said. now watch jay smiths talk on the new findings in 2017.
Jay Smith is a known liar and fraud.
Abd Allah Only to muslims who cant handle the truth of its history. Try the cave event for starters, Muhammed never did say it was Gabriel when he was in there, his wifes cousin Waraqa did. Thrn there is the inescapable truth that these hadith writers from Ishaq to Bukhari are full of crap. ive read it. When you leave 290 year gap before documenting anything and try to ecpect people to remember all this stuff you are clutching at straws to get exact info. Jay Smith knows more about all that than most Muslims. Many muslims are NOTeducated on the past as are Catholics on theirs.
Thats nonsense. There are various hadith collections written before Sahih Bukhari, many from the first century of hijrah. The Hadiths in bukhari are all narrated through verified chains of narrations going back to the prophet. Jay Smith is a clueless liar and fraud, scamming and abusing scared islamophobic christians for money, selling them a false sense of security in their false religion. The irony is, the bible has no legitimicy what so ever. We dont even know who wrote the gospels!
Quran will never change
An entirely redundant conversation unless it can be proved that it wasn’t wholly fabricated by a human being...
[SPOILER ALERT - this cannot be done, no matter how strong the wishful thinking is that compels every attempt.]
Can you please explain further for me?
`Abdullah b. `Umar reportedly said, 'Let none of you say, "I have got the whole of the Qur'an." How does he know what all of it is? MUCH OF THE QUR'AN HAS GONE. Let him say instead, "I have got what has survived."' (Jalal al Din `Abdul Rahman b. Abi Bakr al Suyuti, al-Itqan fi `ulum al-Qur'an, Halabi, Cairo, 1935/1354, Volume 2, p. 25)
-
Said Abu ‘Ubaid:
Isma’il b. Ibrahim related to us from Ayyub from Nafi‘ from Ibn ‘Umar who said - Let none of you say, “I have learned the whole of the Koran,” for how does he know what the whole of it is, WHEN MUCH OF IT HAS DISAPPEARED? Let him rather say, “I have learned what is extant thereof.” (Ibn Warraq, Origins of the Koran -
----
Ismail bin Ibrahim narrated from Ayub from Naf’ee from Ibn Umar who said: ‘Verily among you people one would say that he has found the Quran whilst he is unaware of what the total quantity of the Quran was, because most of the Quran has been lost. Rather one should say that verily he has found the Quran that has appeared.’
When some Christian try to prove a point of something they don't really understand and just spoon feeding from some rendom anti Islam website while on the same time they own book contain so many error and still stand on it,. *Hippocrates* lol
Is for the most part the same. So not the same.
preserved , hmm
if uthman burned mohammadian book.
if uthman changed order of verses.
if 6000verses are not in qoran
if oldest mihammadian book is from 8th century.
if today exist 26 versions of qoran..
if exist version of islam like suni shia wahabi ibazi ...
then answer us : what is preserved ?
Suni shia wahabi ibazi are sects not book. Read the story why the burned and only collecting the orignal one.
Flybirds DivineAri Not true, ref. Ibn Massoud
Nacima Mohamed not true. Ibn Massoud didn’t agree with Uthman’s compilation so he refused to give up his copy. Mohammed had even named him one of four people to learn the Quran from, and he didn’t name Zayd bin Thabit who collected it for Uthman, so the Uthmanic version is unreliable according to Muslim sources. Also, there are numerous hadiths saying how ayahs were lost, eaten by goats and missing. Abdullah bin ‘Umar reportedly said: “Let none of you say, ‘I have got the whole of the Qur’an.’ How does he know what all of it is? MUCH OF THE QUR’AN IS GONE. Let him say instead, ‘I have got what has survived.
Even still there are numerous variants today, from Warsh, Hafs, Douri Qurans to name a few. Looking at the earliest complete Qurans like Topkapi, Sana’a, Samarkand etc. reveals numerous differences among them. There aren’t even any surviving copies going all the way back to Uthman.
So, looking at all available information, and according to Islamic sources as well as academic scholarship it is abundantly clear that the Quran you read is neither perfectly compiled, nor haven’t changed a single verse, letter or dot - which is what Muslims claim. You only believe so because you have been raised as a Muslim and told that the Quran is perfect and unalterable. If you are interested in the truth, you should look at it with intellectual skepticism and an open mind
Nacima Mohamed First of all, recitation is a highly flawed method for conveying information and does not hold scholarly validity, so you are merely making a weak assertion when claiming that the Quran has been perfectly transmitted this way. In fact, Abu Bakr saw the necessity in writing it down when many of the Qurra where killed during the battle of Yamama, he even says “a large part of the Quran will be lost” if not written and collected. Based on authentic hadiths the collection of the Quran was extremely haphazard and disorganized:
“I found with Khuzaima two Verses of Surat-at-Tauba WHICH I HAD NOT FOUND WITH ANYONE ELSE”
“Zuhri reports, 'We have heard that many Qur'an passages were revealed but that those who had memorised them fell in the Yamama fighting. Those passages had not been written down, and following the deaths of those who knew them, were no longer known; nor had Abu Bakr, nor `Umar nor `Uthman as yet collected the texts of the Qur'an.”
Reported 'Aisha (RA): ‘the verse of stoning and of suckling an adult ten times was revealed, and they were (written) on a paper and kept under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) expired and we were occupied by his death, a goat entered and ate away the paper.”
There are multiple other authentic Islamic sources that attests to how flawed the quranic compilation actually was and how it is exceedingly unlikely that the book you have today is the same as was recited to Mohammed. And it is certainly not clear that Ibn Massoud finally accepted Bin Thabit’s compilation, to which he vociferously had protested.
Finally, the argument that the Quran is inimitable is one of the most bizarre claims that anyone can make. Firstly, inimitability is no proof of divine origin, otherwise one can easily say that Mozart’s symphonies or Shakespeare’s sonnets along with basically all artistic work is divine. Secondly, who is to judge what is “like” or “similar”? Is it Islamic scholars who have a vested interest in the Quran’s claim?
None of the arguments you put forth hold any academic or objective standard. You only believe what you have been told
Nacima Mohamed but that doesn’t prove anything. Plus, it’s an unfalsifiable claim. How do you measure imitability? Is there a control experiment, where for example you compare the imitability of the Quran to that of Romeo and Juliet? And who is to judge whether one text is like another?
This inimitability argument really makes no sense
Some non Muslims are claiming that the the Gabriel appeared to Mohammed was Satan in Gabriels form coz it squeezed him. Can you explain it?
I'm sure Satan would have started the recitation of every Surah with the invocation
"I seek refuge with Allah from Shaytan (Satan), the accursed one".
I am sure the satan is the one who bad comment to religion who believe in 1 God alone, believe in prophets of God,believe in scriptures of God, bring the people back from idol worship, human worship, prophet worship....
Alhamdulil’Lah there’s a Honest Non-Muslim (Not sure if He’s a revert or still Non-Muslim) but I uploaded a video of The Oldest scripture of The Qur’an (parts of Surah Taha) proven to be the same as The one in the modern copies, not a change of letter neither words, check it out if you want
He might sound educated but he does not seem to know anything...
;-)
Alright so you will tell us whos educated and whos not? Special superpowers you got there!
@@fluxx9458 Well it obviously does not need "superpowers" to understand that we currently have more than 30 arabic versions of the quràn, many of them reaching back to traditions of the 10th century - wouldn't you agree?
@@svenhedinge438 you don't even know the difference between Versions and Qirat hm
@@fluxx9458 You should mention Qira'at and Ahruf which are also different versions of the text.
Now they have been clearly named as false versions of the Qur'an by early scholars of the 10th century. However later they have been accepted as they obviously have been too widespread to be erased. As they could not be avoided the tale of the seven Ahruf revealed to Mohammed was invented.
Today we have far more versions then just seven Qira'at and seven Ahruf.
The 1924 Kairo version is based on the reading (Qira'at ) of Hafs and was chosen fo political reasons. There are more than 5000 diferences to the Warsh Qur'àn wich is often used for translations because it contains less gramatical errors.
This also includes differences in meaning.
To come back to the point: Nobody can name this situation a "perfect preservation" if he is honest and knows what he is talking about.
It is simple as that:
Any text that exists in more than 30 version is not perfectly preserved may it be the Qur'an or any other text.
Agreed?
@@fluxx9458 You know this guy watches cp and Jay smith lol.
The Yemen Quran has variants and is written over previous text on the pages. First it proves that there is no ONE Quran unchanged, and second, why write over the 'sacred' Quran and change it? Probably because they weren't happy with what was written before.
The Quran has been changed since the beginning, and the earliest Quran is dated around 790 CE, and today we have 26 Qurans with thousands of variants.
So he contradicts himself. I suppose he has to save his job and career.
The Quran was originally orally transmitted and then written. It was memorised by 100s of companions of Muhammad. Uthman later setup a committee of people to authorise the oral transmissions and burnt which didn't corroborate because people started writing / translating their own Quran's and claiming this was it. Therefore, throughout history people have memorised the entire Quran by heart, and this tradition still lives to this day, my own son has memorised it from A-Z, he knows it like a song on the back of his hand. The word of God is protected, all praise be to Allah the Lord of the universe.
>Obi Khan Kenobi
"people started writing / translating their own Quran's and claiming this was it" - this implies that koran can be changed. "throughout history people have memorised the entire Quran by heart" - but memory can make mistakes. We all know that memorizing is not as quality as writing down in terms of accuracy.
Wooow really could you show us two different ones pleeeeease
There is an oral living tradition of the quran.
the arabic writing and grammar were fixed after the quran... so even if we foud different written qurans, we can explain them...
The oral tradition is so strong that you cant change a letter in the quran... that's why you only find scribe mistakes in found Quran and not a whole new verse being added or removed..... that's the reality of the Quran unlike the Bible...
Austin O'Keeffe stop makin joke pls
This film is 6 years too old. Now we know it is not true
Lol, nopem
"..is for the most part accurate"
so the most part were accurate but the rest were not?
No. You thats your only interpretation. It means the research is still continuing and is mostly accurate
...and logically that proves flying donkeys exist...ok..
Islam fell behind 4 centuries ago, even after a golden age where caliphs and sultans suppressed the zealots to open up to worldly wisdom and learning rather than follow a dark age book so closely that it keeps civilization going backwards, a book compiled int he mind of a man who stole inspiration for stories from preexistent beliefs. Every fact the Qu'ran claims as scientific or miraculous has been disproved and refuted, endlessly
and
As someone posted above = Where do I look on Google Maps for the vast doors of bronze that are keeping back the people's of Gog and Magog? (I mean, I can find my house with Google Maps. Vast bronze doors? No sign) The Sun doesn't set in a muddy pool. Sperm does not come from between the backbone and the ribs. The universe was not made from smoke. Salt water and fresh water mix all the time: it's called brackish water and happens in estuaries. The world is not shaped like an ostrich egg. Stars are not lights in the sky to be thrown at demons. Mary the mother of Jesus was never a part of the Christian trinity. There are no invisible pillars holding up heavens. No such thing as flying mules or donkeys, The moon does not emit it's own light. The Jews did not claim Ezra as the son of god - And so on and so on and so on.
Born and raised in Washington D.C., Lumbard was brought up within the Episcopal Church, serving as an altar boy. In his teenage years he lost interest and he was introduced to Islam when a sophomore at George Washington University. He converted to Islam a year and a half later.[4]
I realized that everything that I had been searching for within Christianity was also available within Islam...and that I would be following the message of Jesus just as fully within the Islamic tradition.
here is the problem. lumbard was never serious about christianity as a teen but somehow found jesus's teachings in the quran when he went to college. what this means is he was deceiving himself as a young man and remains a useful western spokesperson for islam. lumbard should ask himself a simple question. if he lived in mecca in muhammad's time and heard muhammad recite a chapter of quran what would have told lumbard that this was a legit prophet of god when there were three other arabs also claiming to be prophets? if lumbard says the beautiful words of quran then that means he never heard the saying "fine words need not be true and true words may not be fine".
RAMADHAN AND QUR'AN
The month of Ramadhan in which was revealed the Qur'an, a guidance for mankind, and clear proof of the guidance, and Creterion (of right and
wrong).
Furqan= Allah's revelation, the expression of Allah's Will, is the true standard by which we judge between right and wrong.
This is the book wherein there is no doubt, a guidance unto those who fear (Allah).
Taqwa = the fear of Allah.
Restraint or guarding one's tongue, hand, and heart frrom evil; hence righteousuess, piety, good conduct.
Believe in Almighty Allah and His last prophet.
MOHAMMAD (PBUH). They are on (true) guidance from their Lord, and it theese are the successful.
Almighty Allah bless all of us.
I think this is the right place
Can someone explain where the Koran came from?
Quran was revealed to the prophet Muhammad by the angel Gabriel over a 23 year period as the word of God almighty who sent Muhammad to the world as a mercy
imu70 did you take your medicine today?
imu70 are you trying to speak? Don’t do drugs. Thats some heavy shit that your on.
@imu70 you're a demonic person. Why are you wasting your time lying?
imu70 is it possible that you are that dumb???
Original Qur'an also preserved in memories of thousands of people and today millions have memorized from age 5 to all people with all ages. Those who argue against should produce something to back it up.
Just say it without any proof 😂
@Baba Quran is clear without contradictions but none knows the meaning of Alif lam mim except Allah 😂
Aren't you guy ever gonna be wise for once? 😏
ASSALAMUALAIKUM HELLO
Furquan There are a number of responses I would like to make to your reply. First of all I believe you should look up the definition of sceptic in a comprehensive dictionary. A sceptic is not someone who does not believe.A sceptic is someone who doubts. You also ask referring to me being sceptic "Which denomination would that be"? I do appreciate your sense of humour. I assume that you that you are not being serious.
Next I would like at the question of hearsay evidence. I would to QUOTE Thomas Payne. He lived in the seventeen hundreds. He was a philosopher and was called the father of the American revolution. He talked about God speaking to a person and then that person conveying the message. He says "It is revelation to the first person only and hearsay to every other and consequently they are not obliged to believe it.
You talk about the origin of the universe in relation to hearsay evidence. I certainly do not know any cosmologist who believes anything about the universe on the basis of hearsay evidence. You ask me and I QUOTE "What (definite) evidence in a court of law that the universe just popped in" et cetera. I know I have left out the full QUOTE for the sake of brevity. Can you name any cosmologist of any standing who would go into a court of law and give definite evidence regarding the origin of the universe?
Now I will ask you an honest question. Can any Muslim go into a court of law and prove the claims of the Koran beyond a reasonable doubt? Have you listened to the Islamic scholar Dr. Joseph Lombard? Listen to his tally on u tube. It's titled "Contemporary issues Is the koran originally preserved" this is what he says (if you think I am quoting him out of context listen to the entire speech) ,,,,,"the story that the Muslims have of the compilation of the Koran is the most part accurate." So in other words Dr.lumbard would not be able to go into a court of law and prove beyond a doubt that that the Koran has been accurately preserved.
I would urge to read Hamza Tzortzis essay on scientific miracles in the koran. He has changed his mind about the scientific miracles in the koran. This is what he says "Regrettably, the scientific miracles narrative has become an intellectual embarrassment for Muslims including myself". He also says " Significantly many Muslims who converted due to the scientific miracles narrative have left the religion due to opposing arguments". Can you blame them??
In closing I cannot see any logical reason why an OMNIPOTENT God would part of is revelation to become corrupt. What is the logical reason?
You said you didnt practise any religion, making you a type of skeptic, with a doubt to the various known religions that is, and thus, the query was justified.
It looks like you formed a stand based on what was quoted from others on what they have purported say or studied.
Hearsay is generally statements or claim that is made without any supportive facts. The Quran has facts in it that can be cross examined and when the fact coincide with the current knowledge, it is not hearsay.
You claim Quran is a type of hearsay, and your reasoning is based on another person's view ie you asked me to go to another site that disprove Quran's scientific miracles. I then must then assume you have studied the whole issues, so let us see if your claim is justified. Perhaps we can take just two issues mentioned in the Quran as below for a short discussion
Issue 1.
75v3-4 Does man think that We cannot [resurrect him and] bring his bones together again? Yea indeed, We are able to make whole his very finger-tips!
The Quran stated that God can resurrect us, rebuilding even our own fingertips. The knowledge about fingertips uniqueness is a recent knowledge . Unless you can prove that such a knowledge existed 1400 yrs ago, then you are rejecting a fact presented by the Quran -- fact is not hearsay.
Issue 2
www.miracles-of-quran.com/internal_waves.htm
In verse 24v40, the Quran mentioned about "internal sea waves" - this kind of waves are not obvious to the naked eyes, it requires sophisticated modern equipments to identify them. Explain how an ancient man 1400 yrs ago, living in the desert, knew such a fact?
@Abu taj md mahbub Ul alam I would to reply to your comments. You say in my closing statements that I denigrate, disparage the Koran and Islam. I do not do anything that you don't do in relation to the Bible and Christianity. Btw I am agnostic. I am not out to defend the Bible or Christianity. I believe all religions including ISLAM promote irrational thinking. My reply will be long so I will have to subdivide it. I am glad I live in a free society where I can criticise any religion I like. If I lived in a Muslim country, I would not enjoy the freedom of thought which I enjoy in the West.
Now to get to the heart of the matter. I will start by going back to Hamza Torztsiz paper entitled
" Does the Qur'an contain scientific miracles" Have you actually read Hamza's paper? Hamza is a member of the Islamic research and education academy. I will now quote from his paper.He says and I QUOTE " The internet is full websites essays videos and posts on the scientific verses in the Qur'an. A Google search on "Qur'an and science" produces over 40 million search results". This movement has classical and modern origins.". End of quote. He goes on to state and I quote " The Islamic scholar Abdul--Masjid Al--Zindani, founder of the Commission on scientific signs in the Qur'an and Sunnah produced a video entitled 'This is the Truth". Al--Zindani invited prominent western academics to attend one of their conferences. During the conference.During the conference Al--Zindani claimed that a group of eminent non Muslim scholars in several fields testified that there scientific miracles in the Qur'an. However, the Commission received criticism that it had spread out of context and misleading statements to justify its narrative. Relatively an atheist video blogger and commentator personally contacted some of the scientists who had attended the conference and conducted interviews with them.The interview were recorded and uploaded on You Tube. ALL OF THE SCIENTISTS HE INTERVIEWED CLAIMED THAT THEIR STATEMENTS HAD BEEN TAKE OT OF CONTEXT AND THAT THERE IS NOTHING MIRACULOUS ABOUT THE SCIENTIFIC STATEMENTS IN THE QUARANIC DICOURSE.". End of quote. So tell me who do I trust?? The atheist or the Islamic scholar?? No wonder Hamza said and i quote" REGRETTABLY, THE SCIENTIFIC MIRACLES NARRITIVE HAS BECOME AN INTELLECTUAL EMBARRASSMENT FOR MUSLIM APOLOGISTS INCLUDING MYSELF". End of quote. ( various words have been highlighted by me ). Hamza also goes on to say and I QUOTE " Significantly, many Muslims who converted to Islam due to the scientific miracles narrative have left the religion due to encountering opposing arguments". End of quote. Hamza is the first Muslim I have to admit that I have heard admitting that many people had left Islam because of the scientific miracle narritive. I urge you to read Hamza's paper carefully and also listen to his You Tube video on the Koran and science which he at a lecture at I.E.R.A. two years ago.To be quite frank, I am now highly suspicious of Islamic scholarship as a result of Hamza's presentations. A QUESTION FOR you. Don't you think it is dishonest of religious people to quote scientists to support their reading of their Holy Book when those scientists disagree with them?
Now to get on to the next point. You write for example and I quote " For example 7 paths to heavens" and the you the go on to write " Now, scientists are doing research on "wormholes " intheuniverse where you can travel vast distances in seconds". What the hell has "7 paths to heavens" got to do with scientists doing research into "wormholes"? First thing I must say . I will QUOTE the world's leading expert on "wormholes". His name is Kip Thorne . He is now the Fenyman Professor of theoretical physicsEmeritus. He won the Nobel Prize in 2017.This is what he says about " wormholes" . And I QUOTE " The jury is not in so we just don't know.But there are very strong indications that wormholes that a human could travel through are forbidden by the laws of physics. That's sad, that's unfortunate but the direction in which things are pointing". Do you know any Muslim cosmologist who would disagree with Professor Thorne? Stephen Hsu Professor of theoretical physics University of Origen says of "wormholes"
" The whole thing is very hypothetical at this point. No one thinks that we are going to find a "wormhole". I could not imagine a contemporary Muslim cosmologist of any standing supporting supporting your statement on "wormholes" in relation to the Koran. I would now like to subdivide into another section to continue my response.
I would now like to QUOTE from Imad -- ad--dean Ahmad. He is a muslim. He is an astrophysicist. He has a Doctrate in the field. He is a lecturer at the University of Maryland.
This is what he has to say and I quote " An off-shoot of this project takes an ABSURD TURN.It attempts to demonstrate in effect that the Koran is a scientific text book--that it is not merely compatible with science but actually foretells and validates specific modern scientific theories."End of quote He then says a few sentences on and I quote" Moreover, this new
movement,to seek out science in the Koran is contrary to the scientific method and, in ignoring the Koran's warning against confusing allegory with basic facts (3:7) is contrary to Islamicteaching.As a 2002 article in the Wall Street Journal described these ideas have become popular among fringe Muslim scholars and students". End of quote In another part of his essay Dr. Ahmad says As impressive as these interpretation were to Bucaille himself, IT IS NOTEWORTHY HE NEVER BECAME A MUSLIM". End of quote.(high lightning mine)
For me the most interesting statements in Dr Ahmad are the following and I QUOTE
Quote from Dr. Ahmad " NOR IS THERE A SINGLE EXAMPLE OF ANY SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY
MADE BY VIRTUE OF STUDYING THE KORAN. CONSIDER THE CASE OF THE CASE OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY PHYSICIAN IBN--AL--NAFIS A MUSLIM WHO DISCOVERED PULMONARY CIRCULATION SYSTEM NOT THROUGH STUDY OF THE KORAN BUT OF AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CREATION OF GOD, THE HUMAN BODY". End of quote. So I think it is reasonable to conclude from this, that we don't need the Koran to make scientific discoveries.
Question for you If the Koran is a veritable treasure of scientific knowledge how come there are only 2 Nobel prize winning Muslim scientist? When you consider the population of Muslims in the world is 1.8 billion people. Strange isn't it? I will now subdivide my presentation and continue my reply to your comments tomorrow.
To continue my reply, this will be my final section on your comments. These comments will look at the various statements about the Bible and Koran. Let me state catagorility that I neither believe that the Bible or The Koran is the Word of God. I am agnostic. Both books promote irrational thinking. That can be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Now you say that the Qu'ran can be used as evidence in a modern court of law. Evidence of What? Now let me get to the arrogant and outrageous statements you make. You write and I QUOTE " In any court of law , The Bible cannot be used as evidence because (1) Hearsay is inadmissible (2) Spectral evidence is inadmissible in a court of law.(3) original documents,only copies that also show forgeries, errors, changes, alterations omissions,interpolation, concoction, contradictions." End of quote. Btw, you are wrong in (1) saying hearsay is inadmissible in a court of law. In English law in can be admitted in limited circumstances. (2) What the hell is spectral Evidence?
Now to get to your statement on the Qur'an in a court of law. This is what you write and I QUOTE QUOTE " But the Holy Qur'an in a modern court as evidence (1) First hand account not hearsay
(2) We have manuscripts dating back to Mohammad time". End of quote. Again, I must ask the Qu'ran as evidence of what in a modern court?
Question have you consulted with a legal expert on what constitutes evidence in a modern court of law? I think not.
Both the Bible and Qur'an are products of hearsay evidence dating between 3,000yrs. and 1,500yrs.approx. Let me explain about hearsay evidence. The American revolutionary and philosopher Thomas Payne. He has been called the father of the American revolution.In his book "The Age of Reason", he has This to say and I QUOTE " Revelation when applied to religion means something communicated from God to man. But admitting for the sake of a case that something has been revealed to a certain person and not revealed to any other person, it is revelation to that person only. When he tells it to a second person, a second to a third to a fourth and so on , it ceases to be a revelation to all those persons. IT IS REVELATION TO THE FIRST PERSON ONLY AND HEARSAY TO EVERY OTHER AND CONSEQUENTLY THEY ARE NOT OBLIGED TO BELIEVE IT". End of quote.(highlighting mine) This statement would be accepted in a any modern court in the Western world. I cannot comment on Muslim countries.
No matter how convinced we are. No matter how much we believe that what we have heard is true, it is still just we have heard. Other than what we believe or heard, there is no evidence that would stand up in any modern court showing that the Qur'an is God's revelation. The same goes for the Bible.When contemporary hearsay witnesses testify, they are placed under oath and can personally attest to cross examination. Historical hearsay cannot be crossexamined.
Now to the second point (2) You say and I QUOTE " We have manuscripts dating back to Muhammad's time. This of course in a modern court, would be insufficient to prove your claim.You have to produce the original documents. Islam does NOT have the original documents, just as there are no original documents of the Bible. Gordon D Nickel is Professor of Islamic studies at London University. This is what he says and I QUOTE " The original copies of the " original " Qur'an is not known to exist. The earliest MANUSCRIPTS of the Qur'an known to academics today are themselves copies". End of quote. BTW, Don't you think that it's a wee bit strange that an all power-full, wise God didn't preserve the Original Qur'an?
CONCLUSION: There is more I could say in response. You have written " Qur'an won Bible lose"
What a silly statement to make . I have refuted your 2 main points about the Koran in a court of law. (1)I can state that the Qur'an is based on hearsay and (2) that there is no original manuscript of the Qur'an Unless you are prepared to bring in to court the shoulder blades of camels and palm leaves dating over one and a half thousand years. Somehow I doubt that will happen. I will close now. Wishing you peace and happyness.
ADDENDUM In the first section of my comments, I did not quote Professor Stephen Hsu accurately His actual quote was ' No one thinks we are going to find a wormhole ant time soon".
End of quote. Sorry about that.
To Answer the question that is proposed, it would be convenient if Allah would send an angel or speak to us himself to confirm if the Quran that we have today is the way he intended it to be.
"Do they [then] wait for anything except that the angels should come to them or your Lord should come or that there come some of the signs of your Lord? The Day that some of the signs of your Lord will come no soul will benefit from its faith as long as it had not believed before or had earned through its faith some good. Say, "Wait. Indeed, we [also] are waiting."
Quran 6:158
Jos Noorhoff many ignorant blind people like yourself made that same argument throughout the history even before Islam and Christianity and Judaism as a matter of fact that stupid question was asked of every prophet by his people and Allah said in Quran about people like you = even if you get what you ask for you still would NOT believe because you have no sincerity in your heart and on the judgement day he will inform you of your errors and punish you accordingly. Dumb deaf and blind that IS what you are.
SALAAMS
I will say only one thing to non believers to try this,
Take your own religious book and try to memorise it, if u can't, and I am sure you won't be able to do it, then try to memorise QURAAN in arabic and see the difference by yourself
What does memorizing the Qur'an in Arabic have to do with anything? It's just memorizing.
Memorization is not a proper way to learn anything.
Say it gain ...
write materal of quran and size
Sources mention various surfaces on which Qur’ānic revelations were recorded in the times of the Prophet (sws). These surfaces can be classified into the following:
1. Saddle Wood
2. Stone Tablets
3. Bone Tablets
4. Leather
5. Parchments
6. Leaves, Branches, Trunks and the Bark of Palm Trees
7. Paper
8. Cloth
9. Dry Clay
where are they?
No
Think about it. The Islamic empire were so big from Morocco to Indonesia. And not all Muslims spoke Arabic. We had so many different languages. Not only that, we’ve gone through so many hardships throughout the history. The Mongols destroyed the Abbasid caliphate and burned the library of Baghdad which was the biggest library in the world if not in history. The same thing happened in Spain. And in the 19th century more 90% of Muslim countries were colonized by non Muslim countries. Yet we still have one version. I mean our enemies could’ve easily sneaked some words and rules in our book. Who would’ve realized that⁉️ . And if someone tried to deny what they could’ve been added to it, their argument would’ve been a clue of not being preserved because we would’ve have had so many groups with different languages arguing about which one is correct and what is not. Which is not the case here. because as I said people were spread all over the map and you know how difficult and long it took to travel from one place to another. We would’ve had so many versions and it doesn’t matter which one is authentic. as matter of fact this is what happened to the Christians and the Jews when the Romans and Bakhnsar took over Jerusalem one after another.
Umar Ibn all Khattab RA said a verse of the Quran went missing
@@maalikserebryakov come on man! you can do better, you’re referring to the verse of stoning. If it was lost how could we know what it’s about?????? That verse was superseded in terms of writing but the rule still valid. Because it still exists in Sunnah. Are you from Bosnia?
well, as I understand it....the older scriptures underneath these texts are not written in arabic ...(as this gentleman states so easily and uncomplicated as point for his whole discourse here)
but a language of the time which was a mix of probably aramaeic language and a preform of arabic ...which was much more rudimental than the later forms of arabic.
through this mix of languages, which had same groups of roots for words but at the same time significant differences in meaning......the one reading these scriptures could only interprete them 'rightly' in the context of the older language....and in context with the prearabic form.
Only using arabic as referencepoint would result in differences of meaning.....which might not be so insignificant in the end....
compared to the modern 'copies' of the official versions these older scriptures reveal different meanings in significant issues.....
Mouna, you're wrong. The underscript of the palimpsest is in Arabic as well. see Behnam Sadighis essay in Der Islam.
Mouna, Sadeghi also lists the most divergent readings in the undertext - six of them. They do not effect the meaning at all. None of the variants effect meanings. basically, the text is the same as we have now. There are a few variants, more than to be observed in other manuscripts. but these are the ones already listed in Muslim Traditions, of the same type as mentioned in the traditions, a divergent surah order - also mentioned in Muslim Traditions - and almost certainly some scribal errors. None change the meanings, most are synonyms. The upper text, Sadeghi shows, is the stronger one, though it's basically the same as the under text.
Bringing to mind the question of the question of how the Arab armies were actually formed.
They were written in Arabic. The infrared photography has proven this.
You would need to cite a source to substantiate such an assertion. I have read every article and book on these manuscripts and I saw a few of them in person when I was in Yemen in the 90s. They are in Arabic, as every scholar who has worked on them will attest. Here is the link to the wikipedia page regarding the manuscripts: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sana%CA%BDa_manuscript If want more detailed analysis, I recommend these two articles: Sadeghi, Behnam; Goudarzi, Mohsen (2012). "Ṣan'ā' 1 and the Origins of the Qur'ān". Der Islam. 87 (1-2): 1-129; Sadeghi, Behnam; Bergmann, Uwe (2010). "The Codex of a Companion of the Prophet and the Qurʾān of the Prophet". Arabica. 57 (4): 343-436.
Is he a Muslim??
Yes
fi hyatun people of science and knowledge are leaving their previous religion and entering Islam
The manuscripts tell us that the Quran was not perfectly preserved, as there are tons of textual variants, even though Muslims say that everything has been perfectly preserved down to the very letter. Furthermore, the only reason the Quran was compiled in the first place was because much of the Quran was already lost, in large part because so many huffaz died in battle. That’s why Abu Bakr ordered the Quran to be compiled, so that more would not be lost. And Sahih al-bukhari and Sahih Muslim record that parts of the Quran were lost in compilation, and so do other early Muslims like Ibn Abi Dawud. Muhammad never envisioned that the Quran would be compiled and written down. This only happened to prevent more from being lost.
Regarding the Sana’a manuscript, why would they have felt the need to wipe off the original text and redo it? It’s because the Quran went through a process of standardization. Changes were made. And the fact that the upper text is not the same as the lower text shows that the Quran evolved and changed over time. The Quran we have today is not at all identical to the original Quran. I don’t know how muslims can believe this when they actually look at the evidence against such a belief. Evidence from both the Hadith and early muslim accounts and the manuscripts themselves. There’s just no real argument to be made for perfect preservation.
Sorry dude but your wrong. Yes Sahabab we’re dying in battle but there were many others that had memorized the Quran as tens of thousands of people had the Quran memorized at that point. Plus yes uthman has to made a standard version since like anything else people were starting to make there own writing of it as they started to write it down full of errors and different writing styles so to prevent corruption uthman had all the Sahabah come together to compile the Quran. There isn’t any Hadith saying that the Quran was lost abrogation did occur but that’s a whole other thing. Plus variation doesn’t mean different Qurans. The sanah manuscript shows that the lower text was written by someone writing the Quran and making errors or not remembering it properly when uthman started to have the Qurans compiled they wrote over the one with errors with the correct one. If it wasn’t for uthman making a standard version the Quran could have been lost like any other text but with uthman it was protected.
@@umaryusuf537 Many people memorized the Qur'an differently from each other. Especially the further back in time you go, the variations are even greater. The Sahaba exhibit great differences in having additional material in individual ayat, but these are not in the standard Uthmanic edition.
Your reasoning that Uthman "prevented corruption" by his human standardization attempt is circular reasoning. If you weren't Muslim you wouldn't make such an assumption. He was attempting to prevent corruption but he was removing many readings that the Sahaba had, and he wanted just one version. But who's to say he and Zaid ibn Thabit had it totally right and the Sahaba didn't? Were these variations among the Sahaba errors in your judgment? You said Uthman had all the Sahaba come together to compile the Qur'an, but this can't be true because their variations are not reflected in the Uthmanic version, and Uthman's version was opposed by the Sahaba. Why aren't Abdullah Ibn Masud's or Ubay ibn Ka'ab's versions canonical today? They were the ones people were supposed to learn the Qur'an from according to Muhammad, not Uthman. But because this is the Qur'an you have today and it's supposed to be perfectly preserved, you basically have to accept whatever Uthman did, even though Abdullah ibn Masud and Ubay ibn Ka'ab opposed Uthman on this. You're assuming Uthman protected the Qur'an but again this is circular reasoning. If you set aside your bias and assumptions, you could more easily conclude that he was preserving an erroneous text. You're assuming Uthman's text is right merely because he preserved something. There's no proof that what he "protected" is without error. And there is a lot of counter-evidence to this, namely notable individuals among the Sahaba who opposed Uthman's official version, and we also have many examples from their recitations that are different from today's version. You just assume Uthman got it right because this is the Qur'an that was passed down to you today. If ibn Masud was the caliph and he was the one to standardize the Qur'an, the Qur'an you have today would be different, and you'd still be saying the same thing that you're saying now about Uthman.
As for abrogation, if you set aside your Muslim bias it's easy to see how abrogation was just an excuse created in the religion for human imperfections and mistakes, and that includes the statement on abrogation in the Qur'an itself, if you lay aside the assumption that the Qur'an is from God. A human being could've easily come up with abrogation as an excuse to explain away various issues and inconsistencies. Just lump all the different issues together and throw them in the abrogation category. Using the standard 'alcohol' example isn't going to cut it for all the issues with abrogation, including all the different kinds of abrogation. Abrogation is now used as a crutch, it seems, for explaining away any inconsistency with the standard narrative. You can just chalk it up to "abrogation." Before Muhammad died there was supposedly a final abrogating recension. This just sounds like a manmade standardization attempt, not a book that is so evidently from God. Throughout its history the Qur'an has undergone a process of standardization. And this is because it's 'supposed' to be perfectly preserved. If it was a miracle and God was the one protecting and preserving it, there wouldn't need to be so many human standardization attempts. And the standardization attempts are only because Muslims 'want' the Qur'an to be preserved, not because it already was.
@@justinwall5249 I understand what your saying but your incorrect. First of all historians who have actually looked at the manuscript have concluded the Quran has been preserved. Just because utham standardized one verse doesn’t mean the Qurans the other Sahaba had was a different one they probably didn’t want the dialect they used to be no longer used especially since the prophet allowed it that doesn’t mean they were different Qurans. And on abrogated I remember you learn more about it since it seems you don’t have a understanding of it but I see what your saying in all religions there is a major element of believe like if we use a non believers judgment then Noah’s ark doesn’t make sense or Moses splitting the sea. You should look at the conclusion the 2 Turkish historians made after looking at all the manuscript they said it’s preserved.
@@justinwall5249 there are some differences in the manuscript like spelling, dialect, scribal errors, and a few other but none of those mean it’s corrupted
@@justinwall5249 some of the sahaba were mad that there dialects were not being used or that there variation were taken away but there variation and dialects were nor different Qurans. And I can see why they were angry about it.there could be many reasons why they opposed it maybe some didn’t like utham or they thought utham wasn’t worthy enough to standardize it since the prophet didn’t so it doesn’t mean they opposes it because they had different Qurans
My question: if the Qur'an has been so perfectly preserved as claimed here, why did Khalif Uthman command that all the original copies of the Qur'an at his time -- especially those recorded by the most trusted reciters and recorders of the Qur'an,: Abdullaah Ibn Mas'uud, Mu'aaz Ibn Jabal, Saalim, and Ka'b (see al-Bukhari Hadith 3760) -- be burned after he made his own version?! Doesn't that sound like a cover up to hide the fact that the Qur'an was not perfectly transmitted as claimed? They should have put these manuscripts in a museum for all to see for themselves as proof of perfect transmission of the Qur'an! By the way, that is what they do with ancient manuscripts of the Bible when they are discovered -- they are put on public display--nothing to hide.
Along with the San'a manuscript how about the Topkapi manuscript in Istanbul, the Taschkent manuscript, and the two old manuscripts in Cairo and Damascus. They are not Uthmanic manuscripts as some believe, but they are quite old. Why don't Islamic scholars make these pre-Uthman Qur'an texts public, like Bible scholars do with old Bible manuscripts? Because they know it would explode the claim that the present Qur'an has not been changed.
You made 2 points
1. Uthman ra burned all the Qur'ans that existed and these were recorded by trusted companions .
Here you don't mention that these trusted companions were all part of a committee set up by uthman to standardise the Qur'an into a text form , all members including these trusted companions agreed that this compiled text is the Qur'an as presented by the prophet Muhammad pbuh . So they may have had their own notes but ultimately agreed upon the uthmanic codex as from God. So burning anything that was not the Qur'an. Burning in itself is not concealing anything as it's seen even today as the most respectful way of disposing of old Qur'ans.
2. Why don't we have access to these early manuscripts ?
Simple ...we do ..every manuscript you mentioned is in a museum or accessible online to everyone and many academics are using them for all types of research .
@@snf321gotti6 Thank you for your reply -- although in my view you are misrepresenting the historical facts.
Point one: The two most highly commended reciters/recorders of Qu'ran -- Abdullah bin Mas'ud and Ubayy ibn Ka'b were not a willing part of a committee to standardize the Qur'an. The fact is they were forced to surrender their original copies of the Qur'an under protest when they were confiscated by Uthman in favor of the codex of Zaid ibn Thabit! Their objections are actually recorded by a number of ancient sources. Here's just one: "I acquired directly from the messenger of Allah (saw) seventy surahs when Zaid was still a childish youth -MUST I NOW FORSAKE WHAT I ACQUIRED directly from the messenger of Allah?" (Ibn Abi Dawud, Kitab al-Masahif, p.15).
Also Abi Dawud (the son of of the famous hadith collector Abu Dawud) in his book "Kitab al-Masahif" compiled numerous pages of differences between the Qur'an codex collections of Abdullah bin Mas'ud and Ubayy ibn Ka'b -- compared to the codex used by Zaid ibn Thabit, which is the basis for Uthman's version of the Qur'an. Therefore burning these original codexes by these reciters most highly commended by Mohammad is very suspicious. In Islamic books this claim is repeatedly made: "NOT ONE LETTER of the Qur’an has been changed over the centuries". If that is is true they should have preserved the original copies for all to see this fact for themselves -- but instead they burned them, to conceal the fact that there are indeed many differences! Even today one can take the Hafs version of the Qur'an and the Warsh version of the Qur'an and see that not every letter is the same. Not only that, words and sentences are different with different meanings in these now existing versions of the Qur'an!
Point two: Also you can compare the various old manuscripts stored in museums which I mentioned before and also find these differences. Also the oldest existing manuscript found to this day -- the Sanaa manuscript -- has so many differences they refuse to make it public! Why the cover up?
@@roccopanepinto9799 as expected much cherry picking and misquoting here.
First point the trusted companions you speak of do not state that they were objecting to the final codex of uthman. Your statement of them being forced is just silly and typical. The haddith you qoute does not conform this .
The codex we have is agreed upon.
The qirat you keep reffing to as differnt qurans are all authentic ways of reciting the quran based upon oral traditions going back to the prophet.
I already explain why burning is not an issue.
Saying the sanaa manuscript is the oldest one and then saying its hidden whilst there are copies of both texts online and many academics have written complete books on it,,, shows your level of intellect and sincerity.
@@snf321gotti6 I find it sad that rather than answering my claims and providing evidence, you accuse me of "cherry picking and misquoting". You wrote in that "the trusted companions were all part of a committee set up by Uthman to standardise the Qur'an" -- if that is true, then can you please give us all reading this a verifiable quote from Abdullah bin Mas'ud or and Ubayy ibn Ka'b commending Uthmann's version of the Qur'an (based on the codex of Zaid ibn Thabit) and also in agreement with their original manuscripts being burned? I gave you a quote from Abdullah bin Mas'ud where he defiantly stated: "MUST I NOW FORSAKE WHAT I ACQUIRED directly from the messenger of Allah?" That doesn't sound willing but is rather an objection!
The differences in the various versions even now in circulation are not just different ways of reciting the Qur'an -- there are different words, with different meanings! Do you agree with the claim by numerous Islamic sources that: "NOT ONE LETTER of the Qur’an has been changed over the centuries" -- If you agree with them, that I can provide you with many examples of different letters and words in various Qur'an versions to prove my point. If you don't agree with this statement made by Islamic sources, then you need to correct them and tell them to stop spreading such misinformation!
Dr. Gerd R. Puin is a renowned Islamicist at Saarland University in Germany and personally on location in Yemen exsamined/studied the Sa'na manuscripts. As a result he came to this conclusion: "My idea is that the Koran is a kind of cocktail of texts that were not all understood even at the time of Muhammad. Many of them may even be a hundred years older than Islam itself. Even within Islamic traditions there is a huge body of contradictory information, including a significant Christian substrate; one can derive a whole Islamic anti-history from them if one wants." He also compiled pages of differences between the Sa'na manuscripts and the now existing Hafs version. Because of his findings the Yemeni authorities have denied him further access to the manuscripts. -- These facts can be verified!
@@roccopanepinto9799 hope you have now had a chance to educate yourself on these matters via the link I posted above .
You have nothing to show that ibn masud rejected ed to the codex of uthman apart from an option in a weak haddith narration .
Show us where in the Muslim world they believed every letter was identical , no one apart from some apologetics have said that and it was not the actual belief of scholars EVER and has never been hidden.
The guy your reffeirmg to is old news and many more acdemics have studied Sanaa and confirm it's just a codex of a companion with notes .
Hashim ...hyde park speaker's corner ....RUclips .
*Hatun* vs *white pigeon* vs *guy slap*
Quran 32:13 Had we willed, we could have given every soul its guidance, but it is already predetermined that I will fill Hell with jinns and humans, all together.*
If u responded to these
I will be a christian right now
And remember
Fear of searching for the truth
Is better that being comfortable with falsehood
Death outside jerusalem
ruclips.net/video/-lHLBEzO-fY/видео.html
? Is jesus the father
ruclips.net/video/amMlwZDeS4U/видео.html
? Was the crucifiction a historcal fact
ruclips.net/video/md2T3vlQq4I/видео.html
? Did the bible refute the crucifiction
ruclips.net/video/mvdgfoWEuL8/видео.html
And if u told me what about tbe quran
I will just gonna give u these videos to proof to u that this book is from god
How the quran was protected by god
Word for word
ruclips.net/video/WL2hDhkYoao/видео.html
Refutation of the varient readings of the quran
ruclips.net/video/x70F_1VXXOw/видео.html
The miraciolous compilation of the quran word for word
muslimgirl.com/compilation-of-the-holy-quran/
The ring structure of the quran
ruclips.net/video/yYY1BGKrr1E/видео.html
Prophets between quran and the bible
ruclips.net/video/lEc_ilaHim8/видео.html
Muhammad ﷺ
allah has promised that he would save koran from getting distorted.
While he was at it, why couldn't he preserve the bible intact. Do you seriously expect me to worship a God who not capable of preserving the bible from error but is capable of preserving the Koran from error.???
Charlie Vaughan u dumb guy the bible is manmade , allah sent down the injeel for the children of isreal, prophets has revelation to different people of different times the quran was sent down for the whole of mankind so we dont need nothing else but the quran
If you want to really put your religion to the test go watch, listen or research of scholars who are atheists or have no obligation to any any religion. Whatever is organised by your fellows in the same faith will most likely be blurred by religious sentiments.
You had Bias from any perspective, if you want the truth then just came to the source. not from the argument of people. do reseach yourself and compare it with the argument that being said.
@@MrSongib
If you understand my comment you'll realise your reply is unnecessary. I know what I am saying because I have done my home work properly but you don't know what you're saying, you're just blindly defending what you don't even understand
If you believe that islam is not truth then it would not bother you that for some people islam is the truth. To each his own or her own. The fact that you are here shows you have some doubts in your own belief system and you choose to engage in some disputes with others ( or at least attract their attention) - it relieves your own tension & disquiet in your own soul.
No problem with reel scolars.
The problem is the christians hate preashers in scolars clouths.
Even muslim god no educated about history of ibrahim. So absurd how can muslim god said that kaba build by ibrahim at mecca but the fact mecca not exist during the life of ibrahim?
Is this a question or your shitty facts
The stories of the prophets in Islam have certain differences to those mentioned in the Torah and the Injeel. According to our beliefs all prophets starting with prophet Adam ( peace be upon him) were muslims.Then some of Adam's children were also prophets( not all his children)..and the lineage continued until Abraham ( peace be upon him). All the prophets can be traced back to prophet Adam with the last prophet being prophet Muhammad ( peace be upon all of them) Most of these prophets were sent to only a specific tribe or community and to different parts of the globe and in different eras. There have been over 100k prophets or more being sent to people in various eras to remind to worship one God. Most prophets did not have a Holy Scripture - they were there just guide their specific community to worship One God.Most of these mesdengers are not listed in the Quran, the Torah and the Gospel. During the era of prophet abraham- he was commanded to build the Ka'baah with his son. But based on my understanding ( on islamic classes i attended) - the kabaah has been built and destroyed and rebuilt again many maby times in human history. Some scholars say there may have been Ka'baah during the flood of Noah's era...but it was destroyed.and it had existed in various times in human history since it may have been built by other prophets before Abraham ( pbuh). Thus that location itself ( present day Mecca) has been a location for worship and pilgrimage most likely for eons. But due to movement of time things changed. Anyway by the time it came to Ibrahim's time - there was no ka'baah standing anymore and God commanded Ibrahim to rebuild so that it would be focal point for muslims ( of his time) to pray and perform pilgrimage. However as centuries passed...the people around that area and surrounding areas ( in modern time we call the land as Saudi Arabia) started to forget islamic monotheism and became idol worshippers. The ka'baah was still there but filled with idols and most worshippers ( the arabs of that time) were pagans. Until the final messenger Prophet Muhammad received his first revelation of the Quran and islam grew ( monotheism to worship one God). Once the final message of Islam was completed - the kabaah was cleared of idols and become 100% a place of worship for muslims. Note - muslims do not pray to the ka'baah. It is merely to unite muslims all over the globe to face in the same direction as per God's command in the Quran. Howver if a muslim needs to pray but for some reason he or she cant find the direction of the ka'baah then it acceptable to pray in any direction. Hope my answer clarifies.
@@lilyrosesoul0077 you have no evidence to claim your stories. All in your book 100% assumption.